The United Republic of Tanzania

THE PREVENTION AND COMBATING OF CORRUPTION BUREAU

NATIONAL GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION SURVEY

2009 REPORT

Volume 3: PUBLIC OFFICIALS SURVEY

and

21st November 2009

F A C E I T

in Association with

DAR/MCC Dar Management and Computing Centre

ii

CONTENTS

CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................ ii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. iii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... iii LIST OF MAPS .................................................................................................................. v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................. v PREFACE ......................................................................................................................... vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ x CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE SURVEY ........................................................................ 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE SURVEY ..................................................................................... 2 CHAPTER 2: SURVEY METHODOLOGY ..................................................................... 3 2.1 SAMPLE DESIGN ....................................................................................................... 3 2.2 REVIEW AND ADAPTATION OF QUESTIONNAIRE ........................................... 4 2.3 RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING OF FIELD TEAMS .......................................... 4 2.4 FIELD WORK ............................................................................................................. 4 2.5 DATA PROCESSING ................................................................................................. 5 2.6 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ULTIMATE SAMPLE OF ....................................... 5 RESPONDENTS ................................................................................................................ 5 CHAPTER 3: THE FINDINGS .......................................................................................... 7 3.1 PERCEPTIONS AND EXPERIENCE OF GOVERNANCE AND ............................ 7 CORRUPTION – EVIDENCE FROM PUBLIC OFFICIALS .......................................... 7 3.2 USERS’ VIEWS OF INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY FOR PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY....................................................................................................................... 21 3.3 HONESTY AND INTEGRITY OF PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS ............................... 22 3.4 INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE........................................................................ 23 3.5 CORRUPTION AND DEVELOPMENT .................................................................. 29 3.6 UNDERSTANDING THE IMPACT OF CORRUPTION ........................................ 35 3.7 OTHER CAUSES OF CORRUPTION ..................................................................... 38 3.8 SERIOUSNESS AND FREQUENCY OF CORRUPTION ....................................... 39 3.9 THE IMPACT AND COSTS OF CORRUPTION .................................................... 42 3.10 SOURCES OF CORRUPTION ............................................................................... 42 3.11 GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION IN KEY SECTORS ................................. 42 3.12 UNBUNDLING THE INCIDENCE OF CORRUPTION ....................................... 43 3.13 PERFORMANCE OF PUBLIC SECTOR ORGANISATIONS ........................... 43 AND CAUSES OF CORRUPTION ................................................................................. 43 3.14 FIGHTING CORRUPTION ................................................................................... 44 CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 52 4.1 CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................................... 52 4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................... 53 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 54 PUBLIC OFFICIALS SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ..................................................... 55 

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Percent Reporting that payment of "bribes" or making payments "under the table" to public servants is widely spread (i) five years ago, (ii) currently, and (iii) expectations in two years to come; percent expressing the practice is widely spread ........................................ 29 Table 2: The Perception on what year or time period corruption was most prevalent in this country (i) First Phase Government, (ii) Second Phase Government, (iii) Third Phase Government, (iv) Fourth Phase Government; Percent reporting it was/is Widely Spread .. 34 Table 3: The score on the perception on the integrity of selected Ministries, Departments and Agencies; Percent reporting ‘Completely dishonest and/or dishonest’ ......................................... 44

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Understanding of Corruption ............................................................................... 8 Figure 2: Understanding of Corruption by Sex ................................................................... 8 Figure 3: Understanding of Corruption by age ................................................................... 9 Figure 4: Understanding of Corruption by salary level ...................................................... 9 Figure 5: Understanding of Corruption by Other Source of Income ................................ 10 Figure 6: Understanding of corruption ............................................................................. 10 Figure 7: Understanding of Corruption as - Demand for sex (%) .................................... 11 Figure 8: Petty (small) corruption ..................................................................................... 12 Figure 9: Grand (big) corruption ....................................................................................... 13 Figure 10: Seriousness of corruption ................................................................................ 13 Figure 11: Percent reporting corruption as a major problem compared to other problems........................................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 12: Bribery is a practical necessity for getting things done quickly ...................... 17 Figure 13: Corruption is beneficial provided you are not caught ..................................... 17 Figure 14: Corruption gives better services ...................................................................... 17 Figure 15: Following laid down procedures is too costly and time wasting .................... 18 Figure 16: People who report corruption end up suffering the most ................................ 18 Figure 17: There is no point of reporting corruption because nothing will be done about it. ....................................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 18: Would not have received protection from possible retaliation ........................ 19 Figure 19: The case cannot be proved .............................................................................. 19 Figure 20: Do not want to betray anyone .......................................................................... 20 Figure 21: Assessment of Corruption in the Society ........................................................ 20 Figure 22: Seriousness of Corruption Compared with other Problems ............................ 21 Figure 23: All public servants have clear idea of the Institution’s objectives and strategies........................................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 24: All public servants treat citizens and users of public services without discrimination ................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 25: Who initiates a bribe........................................................................................ 23 Figure 26: Formal ............................................................................................................. 24 

iv

Figure 27: Simple, clear, easy to understand .................................................................... 24 Figure 28: Decision made in a transparent manner .......................................................... 25 Figure 29: Based on influential connections within the institution .................................. 25 Figure 30: Budget administration ..................................................................................... 25 Figure 31: Budget administration – influenced by illegal Payments (% strongly disagreeing and/or disagreeing ......................................................................................... 26 Figure 32: Are of high quality .......................................................................................... 28 Figure 33:Are accessible by the poor ................................................................................ 28 Figure 34: When directors make decisions, they never take into consideration their subordinates opinions........................................................................................................ 29 Figure 35: Executive decisions do not take into consideration the financial requirements of the institution ................................................................................................................ 29 Figure 36: Percent reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under table payments to public servants is widely spread now ........................................................................... 30 Figure 37: Percent reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under table payments to public servants to be widely spread in two years to come. (%) .................................... 32 Figure 38: During procurement process done transparently ............................................. 35 Figure 39: Process ‘Based on competition and technical criteria’ .................................... 35 Figure 40: Process ‘Influenced by Illegal Payments’ ....................................................... 36 Figure 41: Process ‘Done with the knowledge of the existence of conflict of interest’ ... 36 Figure 42: The procurement processes ............................................................................. 36 Figure 43: Entity has taken deliberate efforts to publicly announce its purchasing plans with existing regulations. .................................................................................................. 37 Figure 44: The entity has consistently complied with the PPA and its Regulations ........ 37 Figure 45: Existence of PPA and its Regulations has not prevented awarding bidders without minimum requirements. ....................................................................................... 38 Figure 46: Greed/selfishness as the cause of Corruption .................................................. 38 Figure 47: High cost of living as the cause of Corruption ................................................ 39 Figure 48: Poor leadership ................................................................................................ 39 Figure 49: High cost of living ........................................................................................... 40 Figure 50: Corruption in Public services .......................................................................... 40 Figure 51: Score on the perception on integrity of selected Ministries ............................ 45 Figure 52: Percent reporting The Police Force completely dishonest and / or dishonest. 46 Figure 53: Percent reporting District/Primary courts ‘Completely dishonest and /or dishonest. .......................................................................................................................... 48 Figure 54: Percent reporting ministry of Lands completely dishonest and / or dishonest 50 

v

LIST OF MAPS

Map 1: Understanding of Corruption as demand for sex .................................................. 12 Map 2: percent reporting corruption as a major problem compared to other problems ... 16 Map 3: Budget administration – influenced by illegal Payments (% strongly disagreeing and/or disagreeing ............................................................................................................. 27 Map 4: Percent reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under table payments to public servants is widely spread now ................................................................................ 31 Map 5: Percent reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under table payments to public servants to be widely spread in two years to come. ............................................... 33 Map 6: Percent reporting The Police Force completely dishonest and / or dishonest. ..... 47 Map 7: Percent reporting District/Primary courts ‘Completely dishonest and /or dishonest. .......................................................................................................................... 49 Map 8: Percent reporting ministry of Lands completely dishonest and / or dishonest ..... 51 

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CPI Corruption Perception Index as developed by Transparency

International

ESRF Economic and Social Research Foundation

FACEIT Front Against Corrupt Elements in Tanzania

ICP International Cooperating Partners

LA Local Authorities

MDAs Ministries, Departments and Agencies

MKUKUTA Mkakati wa Kuondoa Umaskini Tanzania (Poverty Reduction)

MP Member of Parliament

NACSAP National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan

NAO National Audit Office

NFGG National Framework for Good Governance

NGACS National Governance And Corruption Survey

NGOs Non Governmental Organizations

NSSF National Social Security Fund

PCCB Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau

PPA Public Procurement Act

PPRA Public Procurement Regulatory Authority

TANESCO Tanzania Electricity Supply Company

vi

TNBS Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics

TPC Tanzania Postal Corporation

TRA Tanzania Revenue Authority

TTCL Tanzania Telecommunications Company Limited

URT United Republic of Tanzania

TRANSLATIONS

“TAKRIMA” Kiswahili word for payment or material items (including food & drinks) given ostensibly as an unsolicited “goodwill” gesture but in reality, for a favour.

“BAKSHISH” Kiswahili word for payment or an article given as a gift after

receiving good service from someone.

vii

PREFACE

The problem of corruption in our country is not new and certainly it did not start with my

Government i.e. the Fourth Phase Government of The United Republic of Tanzania. Past

Governments have dealt with it in various ways, although corruption remains a problem

in our country, as it is in the whole world, albeit in varying degrees. To tackle corruption,

the country should generally be well governed – that is to have good governance in the

country. This study, National Governance and Corruption Survey is very appropriate in

that sense.

To understand the problem of good governance in general and corruption in particular, it

is important to conduct studies, which will generate facts and indicate appropriate way

forward in the fight against the vice. Without appropriate studies, the fight against

corruption cannot be scientific. The National Governance and Corruption Survey is an

effort towards that end.

In my inaugural speech to Parliament in 2005, I said the following and I quote: we will

accelerate the war on corruption in a more scientific way and by addressing its root

courses …. But all this will not account much if the public is not cooperative. I ask the

full cooperation of citizens in the war on corruption. This report is part of implementation

of that speech, to fight corruption in a more scientific way. The public have indeed

cooperated in giving information to the consultants, who covered all the regions of

Tanzania Mainland in this study.

In 1996, a study similar to this was undertaken by the Third Phase Government. A

Presidential Commission of Inquiry Against Corruption was appointed to carry out a

study on the status of corruption in the country as part of a strategy of the government to

enhance integrity and accountability. The commission released its report one year later

and recommended a number of things as a way of tackling the vice. In 1999 the

government formulated a National Framework on Good Governance (NFGG) to facilitate

the coordination of reforms designed to foster Good Governance and improve public

service delivery. The National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan (NACSAP) was

formulated as a component of the NFGG to increase efforts in corruption prevention. In

2002, the Annual State of Corruption in Tanzania Report was published as part of the

follow-up of the 1996 report. However, this report was less detailed and hence the need

viii

for more detailed and thorough baseline report on the problem of corruption in the

country. The National Governance and Corruption Survey is broad, detailed and captures

important parameters which gives an insight into the problem of corruption in the country

to date.

The National Governance and Corruption Survey add to our understanding of the vice in

the country and offers opportunities for tackling the same. Three surveys, i.e. household,

public servants and enterprises were carried out and some of the main findings are that:

despite the efforts enumerated above, corruption is widespread and a major impediment

to development efforts; the leading cause of corruption is greed among public servants

and business people; in some sectors of public service, corruption has become a way of

life; the institutions which are central in safeguarding good governance like the police

and the judiciary are ranked highest in perpetrating corruption. The indication one gets is

that: my Government have still a long way to go in eradicating this vice and I want to

assure the public that we are equal to the task.

Some of the recommendations are that: more research be carried out on those institutions

which ranked highest and determine the root causes of corruption; the PCCB be

strengthened to be equal to the increasing tasks and increase public awareness on the vice

and elicit their support.

We will take the results of the survey seriously and implement the recommendations

therein to contain corruption in our country.

I would like to thank the Government of Denmark, for providing financial support, which

made this study possible. I would like also to commend the consultants who did a good

job in research and compilation of the report. Last but not least I would like to recognize

the contribution of the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau, who on behalf

of the Government commissioned and supervised the survey.

Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete

President of the United Republic of Tanzania

ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report has been prepared by many individuals under the general supervision of Mr.

Enock L. Kamuzora, Chairman of FACEIT, the lead consultant, and Cletus P.B. Mkai

who led the project team. Other members of the project team were: Professor A.S.

Mawenya, D. Ntukamazina, B.S. Sreekumar, Dr. V.E. Muba, S. Ngallaba, R.

Rutabingwa, Dr. M.M.P. Bundara, M.R. Lugongo and S.J. Chavda.

The consultants benefited from contributions made by the Technical Committee

especially set up for this assignment by the Prevention and Combating of Corruption

Bureau (PCCB): Dr. Vincent Kihiyo (Chairman), Abdallah Mlangwa, Oscar Hosea,

Sabina Seja, Doto Nkonga, Stephen Ndaki, Ahmed Makbel, Mary Rusimbi, Dr. Flora

Kessy, Daniel Kobb, Tim Harris, Emily Poskett and Jack Titsworth.

During fieldwork stage, Grace Morgan, a World Bank consultant, gave valuable insights

during her visit.

Christian Karstensen, First Secretary (Governance and Political Issues) at the Royal

Danish Embassy, provided helpful comments throughout.

Dr. Edward Hoseah, the Director General of PCCB, actively participated to discuss the

draft Report during the first of the five zonal workshops staged in Dar es Salaam, thereby

generating a constructive debate moderated by FACEIT’s Vice-Chairman, E.N.

OleKambainei.

PCCB’s three counter-part staff, Sada Mzimba, Benno Shunda and Abdallah Kitwana

worked long hours throughout the assignment.

We acknowledge with thanks the involvement of the 12 field supervisors and 37 field

interviewers who were employed by FACEIT to carry out the actual fieldwork.

x

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The public officials’ survey was carried out to study the environment relating to the delivery of services in public offices with special emphasis on public sector governance as well as corruption. The survey examined public employee perceptions. The respondents were representatives of a cross section of employees in public offices, including those in political leadership at regional and district levels, those charged with designing and implementing institutional policies as well as supporting or junior staff. The sample also included professionals in the Judiciary and legal offices, audit, revenue collection, public procurement, internal audit as well as staff in local government. The findings of the survey give the views of public officials on the current state of governance and corruption in the country. The current situation about corruption in Tanzania is partly determined by first understanding the word ‘corruption’. In this regard, public officials show hardly any difference between female and male, age groups, as well as salary levels: demand for unofficial payments remains on top, followed by demand for sex (which mainly relate to petty corruption) and abuse of power (which relate mainly to grand corruption). For regions, demand for unofficial payments also remains on top with hardly and regional differences. Perception and experience of governance and corruption When considering the two categories of corruption, that is petty and grand, public officials consider both petty and grand corruption as being very harmful. There are small regional differentials for both petty and grand corruption. The results of this survey show the following were considered causes of corruption by over 80 percent of public officials: greed/selfishness, moral indecency, poor law enforcement/punishment of the corrupt, poor remuneration, lack of control and accountability of public officials, as well as lack of effective corruption reporting system. Only a little over a half of public officials strongly disagree to the statement that ‘bribery is a practical necessity for getting things done quickly’ (55.9 percent) and that ‘following laid down procedures is too costly and time wasting (51.8 percent). However, as high as four out of every five (81.4 percent) either disagree or strongly disagree with the statement that ‘corruption is beneficial provided one is not caught’. As low as only a little over one third (35.7 percent) either disagree or strongly disagree with the statement that ‘people who report corruption end up suffering the most’. This has the consequence of discouraging reporting corruption. The discouragement in reporting is evidenced as still as high as one in three (35.1 percent) either agree or strongly agree with the statement that ‘there is no point reporting because nothing will be done about it’. There is also fear

xi

of retaliation since as high as two thirds (63.7 percent) of public officials either agrees and/or strongly agrees with the statement that they would not have received protection from possible retaliation. Further, as high as 59.5 percent either agrees and/or strongly agrees that even when one is reported, the case can not be proved. Also, as little as only over half strongly disagree and/or disagree with the statement that they do not report as they ‘do not want to betray anyone’. In over two thirds (69.6 percent) of the cases public officials expressed the opinion that when it comes to whom usually initiates a bribe, it is the service provider who indicates or asks for a payment. As high as one-third (32.5 percent) of public officials indicate they had at least once faced a situation where they were obliged to give a bribe to get services. Out of those who recorded giving a bribe, as high as 86.8 percent reported that what they gave in exchange for what they wanted was money. Respondents were presented a list of twenty-two problems and asked to give their opinion on extent of seriousness to each. Problems expressed as being ‘very serious’ by 75 percent and above of public officials included high cost of living, unemployment, inflation, corruption in public services, cost of education and cost of health services. Policies, guidelines and regulations in personnel management as well as general work situation

Public officials perceptions about the quantity and quality of management policies, guidelines and regulations related to personnel issues were measured by way of responses on how decisions at the institution are taken. In a number of solicited areas or statements, only as low as two thirds of public officials reported, they agree and/or strongly agree that respective procedures, rules and practices in place depict signs of good governance. Further, public officials were requested to express their perceptions about the implementation of these procedures during the two financial years prior to the survey as relates to hiring, assignments, changes, promotions, salary increase. In a number of the areas or decisions/statements solicited, only as low as two thirds of public officials agree and/or strongly agree that there are sound governance practices in place. Policies, guidelines and regulations of the administration of the budget One of the questions solicited information on decisions regarding to budget administration (amount assigned to various budget lines, services rendered, programmes carried out, areas that received budget allocation). This part of the questionnaire made investigation using a list of statements related to financial discipline. On the average

xii

public officials agreed with these statements that check on financial discipline. Thus, public officials seem to suggest there is little room within the regulations/procedures for discretion in decision making in budget administration. It is however another thing if they are practiced, going by common complaints by service recipients. Motivation and identification of staff with the goals, mission and institutional strategies, quality of services and citizen support to public sector reform In relation to the development of the daily activities, tasks and functions during the implementation of the services, more than 80 percent of public officials showed that they strongly agree and/or agree with the statement that ‘there exist clearly defined mechanisms that can take into consideration the feedback and needs of the users’. Further that ‘there exist clearly defined mechanisms that channel user’s complaints as well as their preferences’ and ‘receipts of the different transactions are served in hard copy for use during internal and external audits’. However as this has been an area of complaints by recipients of public services, it is recommended that this be a subject of further investigation to exclude the possibility that public officials have been taking a defensive position. Understanding corruption can be traced through exploring decisions made during development of procurement (contracts for goods, works and services) procedures. As low as only a little over 50 percent of public officials strongly agree and/or agree with most of the practices pursued. Further, only as little as over 50 percent of public officials strongly disagree and/or disagree with the following practices during procurement process: ‘are based on regional preferences’; ‘are based on political ties/political affiliations/political pressure’. The others include ‘are based on influential connections within the institution’; ‘are influenced by illegal payments; and ‘are done with the knowledge of the existence of conflict of interest’. In the case of the last statement, it is important to bear in mind that public officials often are also service providers. The contracting process was assessed. Only as low as about 60 percent of public officials strongly agree and/or agree that ‘institutions and their procurement entities do take deliberate efforts to publicly announce its purchasing plans in accordance with the existing regulations’. On whether ‘the institutions, and their procurement entities consistently complied with the Public Procurement Act and it’s Regulations’, only as low as 60.8 percent of public officials strongly agree and/or agree. When it comes to the statement: ‘consistently complying with the Public Procurement Act and its regulations has not completely eliminated awarding contracts to bidders who do not meet minimum requirements’, as high as 45.8 percent of public officials strongly agree and/or agree.

xiii

Quality of implementation of services by institutions was measured. Only as little as over two thirds of public officials rated as strongly agree and/or agree that services offered are of high quality, that they are offered at relatively low cost, that they fully satisfy the user’s needs, and that they are accessible to the poor. It is recommended that this be counterchecked with what households and the private sector says. Further, it is recommended that in subsequent surveys this position should be further investigated as it sounds as if public officials have been showing a defensive position. Information management Public officials expressed opinion on information management, including transparency, feedback/information sharing, staff involvement, management record keeping and value for money. In the following three areas the percentage was about the same for the officials saying they disagree and /or strongly disagree as those saying they agree and/or strongly agree to the statements; that is (i) systems that provide information about public official productivity are scarce and insufficient; (ii) when directors/managers make decisions, they never take into consideration their subordinates’ opinions; and (iii) executive decisions do not take into consideration the financial requirements of the institution. When in an institution management information is deliberately made to be scarce and/or insufficient, this can be a big source of grand corruption. In such a situation directors may decide not to take into consideration the financial requirements of the institution and may never take into consideration subordinates’ opinion. As subordinates are invariably the professionals, only less and less factual and technical inputs may find their way to best inform top decisions. Reforms

Public officials were required to rate various reform measures or reform outcomes. Out of the 13 areas, nine had public officials expressing ‘Don’t know’, that is their position was they were neither ‘against’, ‘in favour’ nor ‘indifferent’ to the stated reform measure. In the public sector, reforms over the years have included setting up (and strengthening) regulatory authorities, moving more into the business of regulating rather than controlling, setting up government executive agencies and other reforms across the civil service as well as pay reforms. While this current baseline survey does not have a previous similar one to compare with, it is more than likely that as a result of all the institutional reforms the situation with respect to governance and corruption has changed. It is important the subsequent surveys design instruments to capture change.

xiv

Change over time in the perception about corruption and mechanism for reporting Governability and perception about corruption was measured from the point of view of the rather common practice in many countries of the world where companies and people pay bribes (make payments ‘under the table’) to public servants. The change over time in the perception about corruption practices was measured for the public sector, local business persons, foreign investors/businesspersons, International Cooperating Partners, as well as Non Governmental Organisations. For the public sector public officials rated this practices was wide spread (most serious) two to five years ago (at over 70 percent) and that currently they rate it at 66 percent with an anticipated decline to 45.4 percent in the next two years to come. Though still very high, the decline may be attributed to the gradual success of the reforms measures cited above, but also legal and/or disciplinary measures on petty corruption cases. It may further be due to revelation as well as current action on grand corruption cases acting as deterrence. The above practice was also measured for the respective institutions where the respondents work. The rating by public officials showed a picture which calls for further research as only between 10 and 20 percent of public officials report this practice as ‘widely spread’, although up to 30 percent reports it occurs sometimes in their institutions. Further, the practice was also measured with the view of comparing the rate of incidence between the durations of the four phases of government from independence. The rating by public officials showed a worsening situation over the years. For the ‘widely spread’ category’ of corruption, as low a rate as 2.3 percent was expressed by public officials for the duration of the first phase government (1961 to 1985) to a high of 78.9 during the third phase government (1995 to 2005). The rate for the fourth phase government is showing signs of decline at 73.4percent. It is important to not here that it has been in the last ten or so years that issues of grand corruption have come so much to the surface.

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE SURVEY This volume on Public Officials is the third in the series of publications for the Tanzania National Governance and Corruption Survey (NGACS) 2009. NGACS comprised of three different surveys carried out simultaneously, namely the household survey, the public officials’ survey and the enterprise survey. The others volumes are Volume 2 - Households and Volume 4 - Enterprises. Volume 1 – Analysis of Main Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations is a commentary on all the three surveys. The diagnostic corruption survey of public officials lasted from 2nd week February to 3rd week June 2009. In 1999, the government of the United Republic of Tanzania (URT) formulated the National Framework for Good Governance (NFGG) to facilitate the coordination of reforms designed to foster good governance and improve public service delivery. The National Anti – Corruption Strategy and Action Plan (NACSAP) was formulated in 1999 as a component of the NFGG as Government’s key management instruments, to combat corruption. Following the launch of the second National Anti – Corruption Strategy and Action Plan (NACSAP II) in 2006, the Government of URT has expressed commitment to undertake a comprehensive diagnostic baseline survey on corruption. The concept paper for NACSAP II states that:

“A comprehensive National Governance and Corruption Survey will be launched presently, and, in the future it will be conducted every two years. It will be established as one of NACSAP’s standard instruments for identifying where corruption occurs and on what scale, conducting analytical work relating survey results to the delivery of services, communicating with the public, and helping set priorities for tackling corruption issues and strengthening corruption – prone ministries, departments, agencies and local government authorities”.

During 2006, the Transparency International Corruption Index for Tanzania was 2.9 giving the country a ranked of 93 out of 163 countries. In 2007, the country’s position improved a bit with a score of 3.2. However, corruption remains a problem. Information on governance issues and levels of corruption is not been adequately collected to inform policy and decision-making. Attempts to gather information on corruption have included the report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry against Corruption, commonly known as The Warioba Commission Report, 1996 and the State of Corruption in Tanzania 2002 report. However, these surveys while answering specific questions on corruption do not provide a comprehensive analysis of the state of corruption in Tanzania and do not establish a baseline needed for policy reform.

2

1.2 PURPOSE OF THE SURVEY The Tanzania National Governance and Corruption Survey (NGACS) 2009 is a baseline survey. The purpose of this survey includes soliciting information and fostering public awareness about national governance and corruption issues. Further it intends to identify areas or issues for further research, providing an empirical and analytical basis to argue for budgetary resources for NACSAP and related reforms, and providing an empirical benchmark and basis for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of government’s governance and anti – corruption programmes over time. The Public Officials survey of NGACS was focused at studying the environment relating to the delivery of services in public offices with special emphasis on public sector governance as well as corruption. The survey examined public employee perceptions.

3

CHAPTER 2: SURVEY METHODOLOGY

2.1 SAMPLE DESIGN The scope of the survey covered the 21 regions of Tanzania Mainland. The design allows estimates of the results at regional level. The sample employed included 30 public establishments per region or municipality in Dar es Salaam. The overall sample was 690 public establishments. The management team in Dar es Salaam did this respective sample selection. The frame was from the Central Register of Establishments maintained at the Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics. This design is adopted from such design as annual surveys of Employment and Earnings as well as Survey of Manufacturing by the Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics.

Ten respondents were selected per establishment giving a sample of 6900 public officials. Within each domain of study (region or municipality in Dar es Salaam), selection of the sample of respondents in the 30 public establishments was controlled to ensure finding the following mix of respondents:

• Members of Parliament • Regional politicians • District politicians • Representatives of the Executive Branch • Policy makers – those designing institutional policies • Programme managers – those charged with implementation of the policies • Support staff – those charged with assisting the policy makers/programme

managers so they best deliver • Public servants • Officers of the Judiciary • Officers of the National Audit Office • Officers of the Tanzania Revenue Authority • Officers of the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority • Officers of Local Authorities (Councils) • Representatives of junior staff • Legal Officer • Officers of the Internal Audit section • Staff of Procurement section.

A guide to help in arriving at pertinent (frame) information to allow this required representative selection was developed for use by the field teams. The response rate was 88.6 percent.

4

2.2 REVIEW AND ADAPTATION OF QUESTIONNAIRE

A questionnaire for the public official survey was adapted from the generic World Bank instrument. The initial process was to compare the generic instruments against a few other African countries specific modifications. To secure Tanzania specific sharpening of the draft instruments, key stakeholders from inside and outside Tanzania with the assistance of FACEIT consultants developed a conceptual framework for adapting an advanced draft for initial approval by the NGACS Technical committee. This version of the questionnaires was translated into Kiswahili followed by a pilot test by FACEIT field team in Dar es Salaam region Temeke municipality. Inputs from the pilot test was used to fine – tune, initially the English version of the questionnaire, by the project management team and then subjected them to review by the Technical Committee. A final set of the both the English and Kiswahili versions of the survey instrument as well as Kiswahili version of field instructions manual were developed to assess the views public officials on corruption in Tanzania. The questionnaire is in appendix 1 and has twelve sections seeking to interrogate on the following: General information of the respondent, Current situation about corruption in Tanzania, Management of personnel, Budget administration, Performance and/or provision of services, Information management, Reforms, Governability, Perception of the National situation, Analysing the corruption problem, and Perception on what action to take for anyone found to be involved in corruption.

2.3 RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING OF FIELD TEAMS Twelve field teams were utilized which comprised of a supervisor and three enumerators. The consultants outsourced both these categories from a pool of freelance field cadre. Supervisors had a degree or its equivalent, with wide experience in field data collection. Enumerators were secondary school leavers also with survey field experience. A set of guidelines prepared by the consultancy firm was used to shortlist and finally pick the required number, plus some reserve to participate in the training. The training initially started with a five-day session for a number equivalent to three teams to manage the pilot test. This was, among other reasons used to sharpen the training manual. Training of the whole team followed approval of the questionnaire.

2.4 FIELD WORK Data collection took place between February and June 2009 for the public officials surveys simultaneously with the other two surveys. This was a difficult period because in many parts of the country it was raining. There were twelve field teams. Apart from Dar es Salaam region each team was assigned two adjacent regions. For Dar es Salaam there were three teams, one covering Ilala and the other two covering Kinondoni and Temeke districts.

5

The field work was initially planned to take about three months, but due to unforeseen reasons the work was extended to over 100 days. Passage to different areas was quite difficult due to the ongoing rains. Lack of reliable transport between and within districts was another problem that slowed movement of the teams.

2.5 DATA PROCESSING Questionnaires were returned to FACEIT office in Dar es Salaam for data processing. Data processing operations consisted of recording of received questionnaires, manual editing, coding, data entry and data cleaning. The data processing team recruited by FACEIT was responsible for the operation. Data entry and editing were performed in Microsoft Office Access software and SPSS 16 (statistical Package for the Social Sciences) software respectively. Data processing commenced on 7th April, 2009 and was completed on 3rd July, 2009.

2.6 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ULTIMATE SAMPLE OF

RESPONDENTS

While the sample of public enterprises was selected by the planning team from the Central Register of Establishments maintained at the Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics, the selection of respondents was done by the supervisors of the field teams after soliciting pertinent information (to establish a useful sampling frame) from the management of the public enterprise selected. The respondents of the public officials’ survey of the National Governance and Corruption Survey 2009 constituted of 57.7 percent males and 42.1 percent women. This is a consequence of the instructions given to the field teams that to the extent possible they should ensure gender balance. Overall, age distribution of respondents was evenly distributed within the five-year age groups of 25 – 29 up to 50 – 54 ranging from a low of 12.9 percent (for the 25 – 29 years age group) to a high of 15.9 (for the age group 30 – 34). The rest of the age groups had lower percentage in terms of representation. In addition to this respondents with college advanced diploma, degree and above accounted for 45.4 percent. Those below secondary school were a mere 2.3 percent. The respondents for the survey were widely spread across professions and functions. The final sample included four members of parliament, eight regional and district politicians

6

and, in respective institutions, 249 policy makers. Otherwise, the majority (53 percent) were a set of selected cadre of officers followed by senior professionals who are supporting staff to Programme Managers (28.2 percent). The remaining categories accounted for less than 5 percent each in the sample. Public officials in the sample working in the area of ‘direct attention, services and/or decisions’ relating to customers accounted for 42.8 percent, with those charged with ‘administrative processes’ 17.8 percent of the respondents. The main activity of the respondents prior to joining the public sector varied. However, they were dominated by those joining the service straight after school or college (64.1 percent) and distantly followed by those working in private sector (12.3 percent). The terms of service for the public service officials in the sample was, as anticipated, lead by staff that are on permanent and pension terms (90.7 percent) and very distantly followed by those on contract (6.9 percent). The procedure reported to have been employed to put the officials interviewed to their present position is governed by three approaches lead by normal promotion (34.6 percent) followed by interview managed by Public Service Commission (32.3 percent) and interviews managed by senior management officials (25.2 percent). Respondents earning less than Tshs 300,000/= accounted for 50 percent, with those earning 300,000/= and above but less than 1,000,000/= being 45 percent. The total number of respondents earning 1,000,000/= and above was 250 in the sample. A quarter of public officials interviewed reported that they had other source(s) of income in addition to the salary. Further, the survey also investigated whether any member of the respondent’s nucleus family (father, mother and their children) own a company or business. About one out of eight public officials are in this category. In summary, the ultimate sample of respondents for the public officials’ component of the NGACS 2009 has the representation to ensure robust and accurate result.

7

CHAPTER 3: THE FINDINGS

3.1 PERCEPTIONS AND EXPERIENCE OF GOVERNANCE AND

CORRUPTION – EVIDENCE FROM PUBLIC OFFICIALS

The current situation about corruption in Tanzania is partly examined by looking at the understanding of the word ‘corruption’. The survey did recognize that the word ‘corruption’ is sometimes difficult to define. However Tanzania PCCB, in the publication ‘Yajue Makosa ya Rushwa Yaliyoainishwa katika Sheria ya Kuzuia na Kupambana na Rushwa, Namba 11 ya 2007’, gives the following (translated from Kiswahili by FACEIT):

“Corruption occurs where a person commits or does not do something to another person or a group of people with an intention of acquiring personal benefits after being given or promised to be given a certain amount of money or other valuable things contrary to laid down procedures and work conditions. Normally, the recipient has certain authority or is employed in an establishment. Moreover, corruption may feature where the recipient or the provider does this for personal interests, interests of another person or a group of people contrary to established procedures.”

Respondents were required to present their opinion on what they understand when one mentions the word ‘corruption’. Eight options were given and a respondent was to mention as many that they think are relevant. Public officials mostly related the word corruption to ‘unofficial payments’ (94.4 percent), ‘demand for sex’ (57.4 percent) and ‘abuse of power’ (31.1 percent) as shown in figure 1.

8

Figure 1: Understanding of Corruption

Thereafter a respondent was requested to list his/her first most serious/important problem, as well as second to third in that order. For the first most important problem these were ‘demand for unofficial payment’ (74.5 percent), ‘demand for sex’ (8.9 percent) and ‘abuse of power’ (5.6 percent). The same three problems appear as second and third problems in terms of seriousness, though with different percentage level and ordering. Results show hardly any difference between female and male public officials. Both sexes hold similar position. As shown in figure 2, demand for unofficial payments remains on top with 94.6 and 94.1 percent for male and female respectively. This is followed by demand for sex with 54.1 and 62 percent for male and female. The third was abuse of power at 34.5 and 26.5 percent for male and female respectively. Figure 2: Understanding of Corruption by Sex

9

When considering age groups there is again hardly any difference observed. All age groups hold similar position. Thus demand for unofficial payments remain on top with 94.2, 94 and 94.9 percent for the under 30, those 30 to 44 and 45 and above respectively. This is followed by demand for sex with 64.6, 58.9 and 52.5 percent. The third was abuse of power at 28.9, 31.6 and 31.4 percent respectively as shown in figure 3. Figure 3: Understanding of Corruption by age

When considering salary levels there is again hardly any difference observed. Cadre at different pay levels hold similar position. Figure 4 show demand for unofficial payments remain on top with 91.1, 93.7 and 95.2 percent for those in the salary ranges of under Tshs 300,000/=, Tshs 300,000/= and above but less than one million and one million and above respectively. This is followed by demand for sex with 49.4, 56.6 and 59.1 percent. The third was abuse of power at 25.3, 27.8 and 32.5 percent respectively. Figure 4: Understanding of Corruption by salary level

10

When considering respondents with or without other sources of income, figure 5 show there is again hardly any difference and the pattern is the same, though with different percentage levels. Public officials coming from households with different household income hold similar position. Figure 5: Understanding of Corruption by Other Source of Income

Figure 6 show that demand for unofficial payments remain on top and shows little variations between regions with between 75.7 (Kigoma region) and 99.7 (Tabora and Mara regions). There are only two regions registering below 90 percent. Figure 6: Understanding of corruption

050

100150

Dod

oma

Arus

ha

Kili

man

ja

Tang

a

Mor

ogor

o

Pw

ani

Dar

es

Lind

i

Mtw

ara

Ruv

uma

Iring

a

Mbe

ya

Sin

gida

Tabo

ra

Ruk

wa

Kig

oma

Shin

yang

Kage

ra

Mw

anza

Mar

a

Man

yara

Tanz

ania

Region

Per

cent

Demand Payment (%) Demand Sex (%)

11

Figure 7 shows that demand for sex show much greater variation, ranging from 23.4 percent for Rukwa to 83.6 percent for Tabora regions. Figure 7: Understanding of Corruption as - Demand for sex (%)

0 20 40 60 80 100

Rukw a

Mbeya

Manyara

Ruvuma

Arusha

Lindi

Iringa

Pw ani

Mara

Kilimanjaro

Kigoma

Tanzania Mainland

Morogoro

Tanga

Dar es Salaam

Mtw ara

Shinyanga

Mw anza

Kagera

Dodoma

Singida

Tabora

Reg

ion

Percent Map 1 shows pattern by zones, with Lake Victoria and central zones showing comparatively high percent of public officials expressing understanding of corruption as demand for sex and southern western highland zone the lowest.

12

Map 1: Understanding of Corruption as demand for sex

When considering the two categories of corruption, that is petty and grand, the average of the scale recorded for each indicates that public officials consider both petty and grand corruption as being very harmful. From figures 8 and 9 below, as high as 88.4 percent of public officials expressed the opinion that petty corruption was very harmful. An even higher percent, 92.8 percent had the opinion that grand corruption was very harmful. Figure 8: Petty (small) corruption

13

Figure 9: Grand (big) corruption

There are regional differentials with regard to petty corruption ranging from 71.7 percent for Tanga and 99.0 percent for Manyara. Three regions recorded 80 percent or below, nine each recording over 80 to 89 percent and over 90 percent respectively. For grand corruption the range is from 77.1 to 98.7 percent with two regions recording 80 percent or below, three over 80 to 89 percent and sixteen over 90 percent. When compared with other problems in Tanzania, figure 10 shows corruption was considered to be a major problem by 92.9 percent of public officials. Figure 10: Seriousness of corruption

14

Percent reporting corruption as a major problem compared to other problems across regions is high and shows little variation. Public officials in Morogoro showed the highest concern with Mbeya showing the lowest.

15

Figure 11: Percent reporting corruption as a major problem compared to other problems

Map 2 continues to show the Lake Victoria zone, including Shinyanga and Kigoma regions as well as the central to east and southern coastal zone with the highest percent of public officials expressing corruption as a major problem compared to other problems. Once again the southern western highland zone shows the lowest.

75 80 85 90 95 100

Mbeya Rukwa

Tanga

Ruvuma

Arusha Tabora

Manyara

Iringa

Kilimanjaro Singida

Tanzania Mainland

Kigoma

Pwani

Dodoma

Mwanza

Kagera

Dar es Salaam

Mtwara

Shinyanga

Mara

Lindi

Morogoro

Region

Percent

16

Map 2: percent reporting corruption as a major problem compared to other problems

A little over a half (55.9 percent) of public officials strongly disagree to the statement that ‘bribery is a practical necessity for getting things done quickly’. When combining with those who just expressed disagreement the figure comes to 79.1. There were still 19.5 who have the opinion that they either just agree or strongly agree with this statement.

17

Figure 12: Bribery is a practical necessity for getting things done quickly

Further, about four out of every five (81.4 percent) either disagree and/or strongly disagree with the statement that ‘corruption is beneficial provided one is not caught’. There are, however still 16.8 who have the opinion that they either just agree or strongly agree with this statement. Figure 13: Corruption is beneficial provided you are not caught

Figure 14: Corruption gives better services

A little over half (57 percent) of public officials also either disagree and/or strongly disagree with the statement that ‘corruption gives better services’.

18

Figure 15: Following laid down procedures is too costly and time wasting

A little over half (51.8 percent) of public officials also either disagree and/or strongly disagree with the statement that ‘following laid down procedures is too costly and time wasting. As high as 46.5 percent agree and/or strongly agree with the statement. Figure 16: People who report corruption end up suffering the most

However, as shown in figure 16 only a little over one-third (35.7 percent) either disagree and/or strongly disagree with the statement that ‘people who report corruption end up suffering the most’. With 56.8 agreeing and/or strongly agreeing with the statement, this has the consequence of discouraging reporting corruption.

19

Figure 17: There is no point of reporting corruption because nothing will be done about it.

The discouragement in reporting is evidenced as still about one in three (35.1 percent) either agree and/or strongly agree with the statement that ‘there is no point reporting because nothing will be done about it’ as shown in figure 17. Figure 18: Would not have received protection from possible retaliation

There is fear of retaliation as about two thirds (63.7 percent) of public officials either agrees and/or strongly agrees with the statement that they would not have received protection from possible retaliation. Figure 19: The case cannot be proved

Further over a half (59.5 percent) either agree and/or strongly agree that even when one is reported, the case cannot be proved.

20

Figure 20: Do not want to betray anyone

Further as shown in figure 20, a little over half strongly disagree and/or disagree with the statement that they do not report as they ‘do not want to betray anyone’. From the above analysis there is evidence that educational campaigns to public officials are required if their mindset with respect to fighting corruption have to be changed. Public officials have expressed they consider corruption as a major problem in the society in general. This is shown in figure 21 to be irrespective of gender and is assessed so by over 90 percent of public officials. Figure 21: Assessment of Corruption in the Society

Corruption is considered to be a major problem across age groups of public officials, being over 90 percent of public officials.

21

Figure 22: Seriousness of Corruption Compared with other Problems

In assessing public officials’ perception on support to public sector reforms, 83.1 percent expressed that the government has full support of public officials in the efforts in implementing public sector reforms. The rate is about the same, at 80.1 percent for the general public.

3.2 USERS’ VIEWS OF INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY FOR PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY

Motivation as well as identification of public officials with institutional goals, mission and strategies has a bearing on performance and/or provision of services. Seven statements having a bearing on these areas were involved to gauge the opinion of public officials. On the average public officials agree with six in the list. These are:- ‘all levels of public servants have a clear idea of institution’s objectives and strategies’; ‘all levels of public servants consider the citizens and users of public services, without discrimination’; ‘all levels of public servants identify with, and are involved with the institutions’ objectives and strategies’. Others are ‘staff clearly understand institutional roles and responsibilities and what duties comprise each role’; ‘the purchasing plan is considered an important planning exercise and takes into consideration the investment plans of the institution and its inventory requirements’; and ‘the budget is an effective tool for planning and executing the plans and strategies of the institution’. However, they showed to be indifferent to the statement that ‘for all levels of public servants, there are incentives to improve the quality of services rendered’. Public officials strongly disagree and/or disagree with the statement that ‘for all levels of public servants, there are

22

incentives to improve the quality of services rendered’ (52 percent). For the rest of the six statements queried, the position of strongly agree and/or agree was taken by more than 50 percent of public officials. Figure 23: All public servants have clear idea of the Institution’s objectives and strategies

Figure 24: All public servants treat citizens and users of public services without discrimination

3.3 HONESTY AND INTEGRITY OF PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS When it comes to the perception about the mechanisms of corruption, public officials were asked to reflect on the corruption cases that they have knowledge of either directly or indirectly. Three scenarios were read to them, i.e. ‘the public official (service provider) would suggest that a bribe must be paid’; ‘the service user offers the bribe’; and ‘normally the parties know how the process works and how much money need to be payed’. Respondents were requested to express their position on this with respect to: (i) a service user being attended, (ii) a local company, in a contractor/client relationship, and (iii) a foreign company, in a contractor/client relationship. When offering services, the

23

public official is the service provider, however for contracts, the situation is different but the question still focused on the public official.

In over two thirds (69.6 percent) of the cases public officials expressed the opinion that when it come to whom usually initiates a bribe, it is the service provider who indicates or asks for a payment as shown in figure 25.

Figure 25: Who initiates a bribe Public officials rated various reform measures or reform outcomes. Out of the 13 areas, nine received an average in the scale showing public officials are ‘in favour’; two had an average showing they were ‘indifferent’ and two had an average expressing being ‘against’. The two depicting ‘against’ were the reforms relating to ‘a decrease in the number of public officials if salary and benefits are increased’, and ‘greater control given to the private sector and civil society over public sector activities’.

3.4 INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE

Public officials perceptions about the quantity and quality of management policies, guidelines, regulations related to personnel issues were measured by way of responses on how decisions at institutions are taken. Only two areas, which are ‘some decisions are based on nepotism considerations’ and ‘some decisions are based on religious considerations’ were recorded with an overall average scale that shows that public officials ‘disagree’ with these statements. The rest of the statements were recorded with an overall average scale showing they ‘agree’ with the statements. Areas or statements where more than two thirds of public officials agree and/or strongly agree include:- ‘that these procedures are formal and written’; ‘that these are simple, clear, and easy to understand’; ‘that these do not require an excessive number of administrative steps’. Others are ‘that these are well supervised (managers make sure that the rules are

24

followed)’; ‘that these are strictly applied (non – compliance always leads to negative consequences for those who do not follow the rules)’; as well as ‘agreed performance targets and measurement criteria are simple’. On the contrary, areas or statements where only less than 10 percent of public officials agree and/or strongly agree include: ‘some decisions are based on nepotism considerations as well as ‘some decisions are based on religious considerations’. Figure 26: Formal

Figure 27: Simple, clear, easy to understand

Further, public officials perceptions about the implementation of these procedures during the last two financial years as relates to hiring, assignments, changes, promotions, salary increase were measured. Areas or decisions/statements where more than two thirds of public officials agree and/or strongly agree include:- ‘decisions were made in a transparent manner (all know who were assigned, promoted, transferred, or received wage increases and why)’; ‘positions falling vacant are made public(when appropriate)’; ‘that decisions are useful for the improvement of institutional efficiency’. Others are ‘that they are subjected to regular audits based on specific criteria and/or process defined in writing’; ‘that they are based on professional experience/merit/performance’; and ‘that they are based on level of education’. On the contrary, areas or decisions/ statements where less than 20 percent of public officials agree and/or strongly agree include: based

25

on family ties, friendship or acquaintance’; ‘influenced by business ties/associations; based on political ties. Others are based on influential connections within the institution; influenced by illegal payments (purchase of positions or promotions); may be due to administration changes within the institution; and likely to favour female staff. Figure 28: Decision made in a transparent manner

Figure 29: Based on influential connections within the institution

With respect to the perception that budget administration decisions in the establishment are, among others, based on (i) Influential Connections within the Institution and (ii) Influenced by Illegal Payments was investigated, the percent of public officials who expressed that they strongly disagree and/or disagree varied between regions as shown in figure 30 below. Figure 30: Budget administration

020406080

100

Dodom

a

Arusha

Kiliman

jaro

Tanga

Morogo

ro

Pwani

Dar es

Sala

am Lindi

Mtwara

Ruvum

aIrin

ga

Mbeya

Singida

Tabora

Rukwa

Kigoma

Shinya

nga

Kagera

Mwanza

Mara

Manya

ra

Tanza

nia M

ainlan

d

Region

Perc

ent

Based on Inf luential Connections (%) Influenced by Illegal Payments (%)

26

For the later (i.e. Influenced by Illegal Payments) Lindi and Dar es Salaam are at the extreme ends with respect to those disagreeing, as shown in figure 31, in terms of position taken by public officials. Similarly for the perception on the decisions in the procurement (contracts for goods, works and services) process during the last two calendar years (i.e. 2006 and 2007). Figure 31: Budget administration – influenced by illegal Payments (% strongly disagreeing and/or disagreeing

0 20 40 60 80 100

Dar es Salaam Kigoma

Tanga Kagera

Mwanza Ruvuma

Tabora Arusha Mbeya

Manyara

Tanzania Mainland

Morogoro

Dodoma

Kilimanjaro

Singida

Pwani

Rukwa

Iringa

Shinyanga Mtwara

Lindi Mara

Region

PercentInfluenced by Illegal Payments (%)

27

Map 3 continues to show that highest percentage of public officials from the Lake Victoria Zone, including Shinyanga region, as well as south eastern coastal belt expressed the position of strongly disagreeing and/or disagreeing with the statement that ‘Budget administration are influenced by illegal payment.. Map 3: Budget administration – influenced by illegal Payments (% strongly disagreeing and/or disagreeing

Quality of implementation of services by institutions was measured. More than two thirds of public officials rated as agree and/or strongly agree that services offered are of high quality; that they are offered at relatively low cost; that they fully satisfy the user’s needs; and that they are accessible to the poor. Areas for which public officials rated as agree and/or strongly agree with a rank less than 20 percent is the one that the services are performed according to informal (not written) rules.

28

Figure 32: Are of high quality

0.20% 3.10%

15.40%

7.60%

7.60%

7.60% No responseStrongly disagreeDisagreeIndifferentAgreeStrongly agree

Figure 33:Are accessible by the poor

0.30% 2.30%

8.30%

7.40%7.40%

7.40% No responseStrongly disagreeDisagreeIndifferentAgreeStrongly agree

Public officials expressed opinion on information management, including transparency, feedback and/or information sharing, staff involvement, management, record keeping and value for money. The average scale scores in four of the five cases indicate that in this case public officials were mostly ‘indifferent’ and the fifth case show they disagree (in the case of ‘the institution does not have an adequate system for recording managerial decisions). This later case indicates that public officials are expressing considerable trust in information management, which is an important basis in good governance and allaying grand corruption. In the following three areas, the percentage was about the same for the officials who took the position to disagree and /or strongly disagree as those saying they agree and/or strongly agree:

(i) systems that provide information about public official productivity are scarce and insufficient

(ii) when directors/managers make decisions, they never take into consideration their subordinates’ opinions

(iii) (iii) executive decisions do not take into consideration the financial requirements of the institution,

29

Figure 34: When directors make decisions, they never take into consideration their subordinates opinions

0.40% 13.50%

28%

13.80%

28.50%

15.80% No responseStrongly disagreeDisagreeIndifferentAgreeStrongly agree

Figure 35: Executive decisions do not take into consideration the financial requirements of the institution

0.40% 13.60%

28.20%

17.50%

26.30%

14% No responseStrongly disagreeDisagreeIndifferentAgreeStrongly agree

3.5 CORRUPTION AND DEVELOPMENT About one third (32.5 percent) of public officials indicate they had at least once faced a situation where they were obliged to give a bribe to get services. Out of those who recorded giving a bribe 86.8 percent reported that what they gave in exchange for what they wanted was money. Public officials in most regions reported the payment of "bribes" or making payments "under the table" to public servants as more widely spread five years ago, declining as at the current period and with an expectation it will be lower in two years to come as shown in Table 1 across all the regions. Table 1: Percent Reporting that payment of "bribes" or making payments "under the table" to public servants is widely spread (i) five years ago, (ii) currently, and (iii) expectations in two years to come; percent expressing the practice is widely spread

Five years ago (%)

Currently (%)

Expectations in two years to come (%)

Dodoma 73.3 73.3 47.9

Arusha 56.7 54.3 27.0

30

Kilimanjaro 67.1 52.3 33.6

Tanga 62.1 36.9 28.7

Morogoro 84.5 56.7 30.2

Pwani 62.5 63.2 37.5

Dar es Salaam 82.8 84.7 69.4

Lindi 67.4 57.7 26.2

Mtwara 65.4 67.8 41.0

Ruvuma 61.4 46.4 38.0

Iringa 66.5 49.2 55.0

Mbeya 76.0 51.6 44.4

Singida 59.9 61.8 30.0

Tabora 73.2 63.6 29.9

Rukwa 68.2 70.5 48.6

Kigoma 71.8 76.4 43.6

Shinyanga 66.8 77.5 71.5

Kagera 78.6 67.6 25.1

Mwanza 79.1 63.5 40.9

Mara 82.9 96.5 89.9

Manyara 68.2 68.8 42.1

Figures 36 present the fluctuations across regions, showing significant differences Figure 36: Percent reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under table payments to public servants is widely spread now

020406080

100120

Dodom

a

Arusha

Kiliman

jaro

Tanga

Morogo

ro

Pwani

Dar es

Sala

am Lindi

Mtwara

Ruvum

aIrin

ga

Mbeya

Singida

Tabora

Rukwa

Kigoma

Shinya

nga

Kagera

Mwanza

Mara

Manya

ra

Tanza

nia M

ainlan

d

Region

Perc

ent

31

Map 4 still shows percentage reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under the table payments to public servants is widely spread currently/now is highest in Lake Victoria zone, including Shinyanga region and lowest in south western highland zone. Map 4: Percent reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under table payments to public servants is widely spread now

Figures 37 present the fluctuations across regions, showing again significant differences

32

Figure 37: Percent reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under table payments to public servants to be widely spread in two years to come. (%)

020406080

100

Dodom

a

Arusha

Kilimanja

roTa

nga

Morogoro

Pwani

Dar es

Sala

am Lindi

Mtwara

Ruvum

aIrin

gaMbe

ya

Singida

Tabora

Rukwa

Kigoma

Shinya

nga

Kagera

Mwanza

Mara

Manyara

Tanza

nia Main

land

Region

Perc

ent

Map 5 continues to show percentage reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under the table payments to public servants is widely spread in two years to come is highest in Lake Victoria zone, including Shinyanga region, and lowest in south western highland zone.

33

Map 5: Percent reporting expectations for payment of bribes or under table payments to public servants to be widely spread in two years to come.

Perceptions of public officials on how this situation has evolved in the last four decades are presented for the four phases of government as shown in table 2 below. Overall, the figures show that while the situation had worsened to a high of 78.9 percent during the third phase government, there is evidence of improvement during the fourth phase government (73.4 %). This trend is evident in 13 out of the 21 regions, with the remaining showing no sign of improvement.

34

Table 2: The Perception on what year or time period corruption was most prevalent in this country (i) First Phase Government, (ii) Second Phase Government, (iii) Third Phase Government, (iv) Fourth Phase Government; Percent reporting it was/is Widely Spread

First Phase Government

(%)

Second Phase Government

(%)

Third Phase Government

(%)

Fourth Phase Government

(%)

Dodoma 1.8 53.9 64.5 68.2

Arusha 0.3 49.8 91.5 80.2

Kilimanjaro 1.0 60.1 81.9 62.1

Tanga 1.3 24.2 84.1 74.5

Morogoro 3.7 61.2 89.0 73.5

Pwani 4.4 54.4 83.1 58.8

Dar es Salaam 1.1 43.1 89.2 84.8

Lindi 3.9 44.8 60.6 60.9

Mtwara 5.4 43.1 58.3 68.5

Ruvuma 6.6 48.8 78.3 78.3

Iringa 5.0 63.5 87.3 76.5

Mbeya 0.0 45.3 72.9 73.3

Singida 2.9 57.5 63.3 60.9

Tabora 1.4 44.0 76.3 65.6

Rukwa 0.0 45.9 75.5 78.2

Kigoma 0.7 57.9 78.9 73.2

Shinyanga 3.7 34.9 73.5 68.1

Kagera 3.0 51.5 69.6 59.2

Mwanza 1.3 49.8 72.8 78.1

Mara 2.4 57.8 92.0 87.1

Manyara 1.3 47.3 86.2 85.9

Tanzania Mainland 2.3 47.3 78.9 73.4 .

35

3.6 UNDERSTANDING THE IMPACT OF CORRUPTION

Understanding corruption can be traced through exploring decisions made during development of procurement (contracts for goods, works and services) procedures. More than 50 percent of public officials strongly agree and/or agree with the following practices during procurement process as shown in figures 37 t0 40: ‘done transparently (every one can know who was awarded what and why)’; processes are public and open to the knowledge of and suggestions from the users’. In addition, ‘they are subjected to regular audits by the internal control unit’; ‘subjected to regular external audits’; ‘are based on specific criteria defined in writing’. Further, ‘based on direct evaluation of the directors/managers immediately involved in the matter (free from excessive bureaucratic steps); and ‘are based on competition and technical criteria’. On the other hand more than 50 percent of public officials strongly disagree and/or disagree with the following statements regarding procurement process: ‘are based on regional preferences’; ‘are based on political ties/political affiliations/political pressure’. Others are based on influential connections within the institution’; ‘are influenced by illegal payments’; and ‘are done with the knowledge of the existence of conflict of interest’. Figure 38: During procurement process done transparently

Figure 39: Process ‘Based on competition and technical criteria’

36

Figure 40: Process ‘Influenced by Illegal Payments’

Figure 41: Process ‘Done with the knowledge of the existence of conflict of interest’

Two statements on the process of procurement are displayed to indicate extent of regional differentials, these are: ‘decisions are based on influential connections’ and decisions influenced by illegal payments’. There are regional differences as shown in figure 42. Figure 42: The procurement processes

0102030405060708090

100

Dodom

a

Arusha

Kiliman

jaro

Tanga

Morogo

ro

Pwani

Dar es

Sala

am Lindi

Mtwara

Ruvum

aIrin

ga

Mbeya

Singida

Tabora

Rukwa

Kigoma

Shinya

nga

Kagera

Mwanza

Mara

Manya

ra

Tanza

nia M

ainlan

d

Region

Perc

ent

Based on Influential Connections (%) Influenced by Illegal Payments (%)

37

Further, the contracting process was assessed. While 10.8 percent of public officials strongly disagree and/or disagree that ‘institutions and their procurement entities do take deliberate efforts to publicly announce its purchasing plans in accordance with the existing regulations’, 60 percent strongly agree and/or agree that this practice exists, with the rest showing to be indifferent. On whether ‘the institutions, and their procurement entities, consistently complied with the Public procurement Act and its regulations’ 8.4 percent of public officials strongly disagree and/or disagree while 60.8 percent strongly agree and/or agree. Further, on the issue that ‘consistently complying with the Public Procurement Act and its regulations has not completely eliminated awarding contracts to bidders who do not meet minimum requirements’, 18.7 of public officials strongly disagree and/or disagree while 45.8 percent strongly agree and/or agree with the statement. The position taken by the rest showing they are indifferent. Figure 43: Entity has taken deliberate efforts to publicly announce its purchasing plans with existing regulations.

Figure 44: The entity has consistently complied with the PPA and its Regulations

38

Figure 45: Existence of PPA and its Regulations has not prevented awarding bidders without minimum requirements.

Perception about irregularities and misappropriation of funds were measured from the point of view of outputs of audit reports. From such reports awarded in the previous financial year to public institutions, about 53 percent of public officials expressed having no knowledge about them. A little over a quarter (26.2 percent) of the audit reports were reported by these officials to be ‘unqualified’ or clean reports.

3.7 OTHER CAUSES OF CORRUPTION Invariably with respect to petty corruption, one third of public officials do not consider poverty as a source of corruption. However the following were considered by more than two thirds as causes of corruption; greed/selfishness (96.6 percent), high cost of living (79.3 percent), poor remuneration (83 percent), lack of control and accountability of public officials (81.2 percent), lack of independent and effective judiciary (69.3 percent). Others are moral indecency (90.9 percent), poor leadership (78.5 percent), lack of effective corruption reporting system (80.6), and poor law enforcement/punishment of the corrupt (85.2 percent). Furthermore, a little over two thirds (65.9 percent) expressed the opinion that corruption does not lead to giving better services. Figure 46: Greed/selfishness as the cause of Corruption

39

Figure 47: High cost of living as the cause of Corruption

Figure 48: Poor leadership

3.8 SERIOUSNESS AND FREQUENCY OF CORRUPTION

Respondents were presented a list of problems and asked to give their opinion on extent of seriousness to each. The majority of public officials consider that each area in the list, with the exception of ‘violence’ pose a ‘very serious’ problem. For ‘violence’ a small majority (38 percent) expressed this as just ‘serious’. Problems expressed as being ‘very serious’ by 75 percent and above by public officials included high cost of living, unemployment, inflation, corruption in public services, cost of education and cost of health services. Those considered ‘very serious’ by 50 percent or more but less than 75 percent included safety concerns/crime, drug trafficking, lack of good leadership, corruption in private sector, access to clean water, food availability, poor quality roads, police harassment, unfair judicial system, destruction of environment, shortage of housing and delinquency. Finally, problems related to drug abuse, political instability, gender stereotypes/bias and violence were rated ‘very serious’ by under 50 percent of public officials. Respondents were also asked to express their opinion as to which, among the list of problems, is the three most serious problems currently affecting Tanzania. For the first

40

important problem, results show public officials ranked ‘high cost of living’ (39.9 percent), followed by ‘inflation’ (10.8 percent), ‘corruption in public service’ (9.6 percent) and ‘unemployment’ (9.2 percent). Each of the rest in the list accounted for less than 6 percent.

For the second important problem results show public officials ranked ‘inflation’ (18.6 percent), followed by ‘unemployment’ (15.5 percent), ‘corruption in public service’ (12.5 percent) and ‘high cost of living’ (10.8 percent). Each of the rest in the list accounted for less than 8 percent.

For the third important problem, results show public officials ranked ‘corruption in public service’ (13.9 percent), ‘inflation’ (13.6 percent), followed by ‘high cost of living’ (8.1 percent) and ‘cost of education’ (7.6 percent). Each of the rest in the list accounted for less than 7 percent.

From the above one may deduce that the top most serious problems currently affecting Tanzania include ‘high cost of living’ and/or ‘inflation’ and ‘corruption in public services’ in that order.

Figure 49: High cost of living

90%

9.10%

0.50% 0.40%

No responseVery seriousSeriousVery trivial

Figure 50: Corruption in Public services

85.20%

12.90%1.40% 0.50%

No responseVery seriousSeriousVery trivial

41

Governability and perception about corruption was measured from the point of view of the rather common practice in many countries of the world where companies and people pay bribes (make payments ‘under the table’) to public servants. Public officials rated this practices was wide spread (most serious) two to five years ago (at over 70 percent) and that currently they rate it at 66 percent with an anticipated decline to 45.4 percent in the next two years to come. For local businesspersons the rating by public officials showed about the same level and pattern. The practice was also measured for foreign investors/businesspersons. The rating by public officials showed hardly any change during the last five years (rating at over 60 percent). However the expectation for this category of investors is a decline to about 47 percent in the next two years. The above practice was also measured for International Cooperating Partners. The highest rating by public officials showed, by 30 to 50 percent, that the practice has been nonexistent over the last five years and the expectation shows the same in the next two years. For Non Governmental Organisations the rating by public officials showed hardly any change during the last five years (rating at over 60 percent). The highest rating by public officials showed, by 40 to 50 percent, that the practice has been there only sometimes. The above practice was measured for the institution in which respondents are employed. The rating by public officials showed a picture which calls for further research as only between 10 and 20 percent of public officials report this practice as ‘widely spread’, although up to 30 percent reports it occurs sometimes. The above practice was measured with the view of comparing the rate of incidence between the durations of the four phases of government from independence to the current period. The rating by public officials showed a worsening situation over the years. For the ‘widely spread’ category’ of corruption, as low a rate as 2.3 percent was expressed by public officials for the duration of the first phase government (1961 to 1985) to a high of 78.9 during the third phase government (1995 to 2005). While still high, there is a likelihood of improvement the fourth phase period is rated at 73.4 percent. Public officials expressed their opinion regarding the practices of bribes to obtain public services, bribes to alter regulatory and legal decisions as well as bribes in the procurement (goods, works and services) processes. In all the cases the rating was lowest for the practice ‘widely spread’ at around 20 percent.

42

3.9 THE IMPACT AND COSTS OF CORRUPTION

The issue of governability or governance as relates to irregularities and/or misappropriation of funds in the process of the awarding mechanisms of public contracts (goods, works and services) may not be public knowledge to the majority of public officials in their institutions. Despite this, knowledge on the number of public contracts where illegal payments was used in order to secure the awarding of contracts was investigated. As expected, 76.7 percent of public officials expressed they do not know. However 14.8 percent are of the opinion that there are no such contracts. A little fewer than 10 percent of the numbers of public contracts however were expressed to have had involvement of illegal payments according to public officials.

3.10 SOURCES OF CORRUPTION

In relation to the development of the daily activities, tasks and functions during the implementation of the services, the average scale score for the three statements showed that public officials agree with the statements. Public officials showed that they strongly disagree and/or disagree with the statement that ‘there exist clearly defined mechanisms that can take into consideration the feedback and needs of the users’ (11.6 percent). Those who strongly agree and/or agree were 82.3 percent. With respect to whether ‘there exist clearly defined mechanisms that channel user’s complaints as well as their preferences’ 14.5 percent of public officials strongly disagree and/or disagree with the statement while 80.4 strongly agree and/or agree. Finally, with respect to whether ‘receipts of the different transactions are served in hard copy for use during internal and external audits’ the figures were 1.8 and 86 percent respectively. The difference in percentage in all the cases noted they were indifferent.

3.11 GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION IN KEY SECTORS

The survey investigated the corruption problem across public institutions, basically in an attempt to assess the integrity of respective organisations. Out of the institutions listed for investigation, eleven were rated by two thirds or more as being honest and/or completely honest. These are the Parliament (69.4 percent), the Army (81.1 percent), National Audit Office (66.9 percent), Offices of District Commissioners (72.1 percent), Social Security Funds (66.5 percent), Commercial Banks (72 percent), the Private Sector (70.3 percent), Trade Unions (77.8 percent), NGOs (73.5 percent) and PCCB (68.7 percent). On the

43

other hand the organisation which were rated lowest with respect to honesty were Ministry of Finance (50.5 percent), High Court (51.2 percent), Bank of Tanzania (41.9 percent), Police Force (31.1 percent), District/Primary Courts (36.3 percent), Ministry of Home Affairs (52.8 percent) and the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development (44.9 percent). Public officials were also required to assess how efficient or inefficient a list of selected institutions was at exercising social control over public entities. Those rated by public officials as having the highest influence are Faith Based Institutions (94.7 percent), Mass Media (93.6 percent), Trade Unions (86 percent), Commission for Human Rights (82.2 percent) and NGOs (81.8 percent).

3.12 UNBUNDLING THE INCIDENCE OF CORRUPTION

Clients of public institutions in many countries are known to influence in various capacity or domain, through bribes, the decisions made by top public sector officials. Public officials rated multinational companies (at 63.9 percent) and unscrupulous businesspersons (at 64.8) as the top two. Public officials were requested to state how frequently a selected list of corrupt practices occurred in contracting processes. The list includes technical deviation of the contract, Contractor monopolies, Modifying the terms of the contract to favour the interest of a company, contracting with fictitious or nonexistent, presenting offers from non existent competitors, Bribery to award contract, and Bid rigging. This question has a rather high number not responding, with a little over one third of public officials falling in this category. For the public officials who expressed their position, the majority rated the corrupt practices as ‘not frequent’ (at around 35 to 40 percent).

3.13 PERFORMANCE OF PUBLIC SECTOR ORGANISATIONS

AND CAUSES OF CORRUPTION

Decisions regarding to budget administration (amount assigned to various budget lines, services rendered, programmes carried out, areas the received budget allocation) were investigated using a list of statements. On the average public officials agreed with the following statements – ‘the budget administration decisions are subjected to regular audits by internal control unit’; ‘the budget administration decisions are subjected to regular external audits’; ‘the budget administration decisions are based on specific criteria defined in writing’; and ‘the budget administration decisions are based on purely

44

technical criteria’. However on the average they disagree with the statements – ‘the budget administration decisions are influenced by regional ties’; ‘the budget administration decisions are based on political ties/political affiliation/political pressure’; ‘the budget administration decisions are based on influential connections within the institution’. Others are ‘the budget administration decisions are influenced by illegal payments’; and ‘the budget administration decisions are influenced by administration changes within the institutions’. This last position suggests little room for discretion in decision making in budget administration, which is positive for good governance.

3.14 FIGHTING CORRUPTION

Information on general work satisfaction with occupation and compensation was solicited from public officials in a list of four identified areas as an entry point in fighting corruption. Public officials, on the average rated that they agree to the statement that ‘to work in the public sector is better than to work in the private sector’. They were indifferent to the statement ‘I have nowhere else to go’. However, they disagree to the statements ‘my salary and benefits are very satisfactory’ as well as ‘my standard of living or personal economic standing has improved due to my salary increase’. The positions taken by public officials in this respect do not seem to be very consistent, thus more research may be called for. Fighting corruption can have its starting point from the study of integrity within institutions. The score on the perception by public officials on the integrity of selected Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs), looking at percent perceived as ‘completely dishonest and/or dishonest’ is presented in table 3 below. For each region there are differences across MDAs and for each MDA there are differences across regions. Table 3: The score on the perception on the integrity of selected Ministries, Departments and Agencies; Percent reporting ‘Completely dishonest and/or dishonest’

Ministry of Health Ministry of

Education

The Police Force

District/Primary Courts

PCCB Ministry of Lands

Dodoma 40.6 46.1 57.1 60.9 33.2 59.9

Arusha 50.6 46.8 84.3 77.4 17.4 69.6

Kilimanjaro 40.6 36.2 62.1 48.0 16.8 49.0

Tanga 31.9 29.9 52.2 40.1 12.5 44.6

45

Morogoro 47.8 31.1 73.5 62.2 17.5 58.4

Pwani 37.5 28.0 54.1 48.2 28.4 44.5

Dar es Salaam 51.4 46.1 73.9 66.8 41.6 61.6

Lindi 27.9 8.6 49.1 44.5 10.8 30.5

Mtwara 34.5 15.6 58.0 46.8 22.8 41.4

Ruvuma 17.5 15.7 33.7 21.1 15.0 25.9

Iringa 12.7 17.3 46.6 23.5 6.9 17.0

Mbeya 6.2 6.2 42.7 37.8 19.1 33.4

Singida 51.3 41.5 60.9 59.9 33.4 63.7

Tabora 46.7 27.5 66.7 57.4 24.4 55.3

Rukwa 44.1 38.2 60.5 54.5 30.0 43.6

Kigoma 47.9 37.1 73.9 62.2 36.4 63.9

Shinyanga 53.7 40.9 75.5 68.8 16.8 46.0

Kagera 20.7 17.4 58.2 49.8 18.0 27.5

Mwanza 34.9 28.9 65.4 61.5 19.6 45.8

Mara 43.5 34.5 93.8 87.1 1.7 40.1

Manyara 28.6 42.4 72.6 76.2 9.7 68.5

Tanzania

Mainland 39.3 32.5

65.0 57.4 21.7 48.8

Figure 51 presents line graph showing regions differentials for the situation for the Police Force and Ministry of Lands. Across all the regions the situation is worse, almost without exception, for the Police Force. Figure 51: Score on the perception on integrity of selected Ministries

020406080

100

Dodom

a

Arusha

Kiliman

jaro

Tanga

Morogo

ro

Pwani

Dar es

Sala

am Lindi

Mtwara

Ruvum

aIrin

ga

Mbeya

Singida

Tabora

Rukwa

Kigoma

Shinya

nga

Kagera

Mwanza

Mara

Manya

ra

Tanza

nia M

ainlan

d

Region

Perc

ent

The Police Force Ministry of Lands

46

Figures 52, however, show significant variations across regions for the Police Force. The extremes are Mara region expressing the highest dissatisfaction and Ruvuma region with a majority of Public Officials happy with the Police Forces’ performance. Figure 52: Percent reporting The Police Force completely dishonest and / or dishonest.

0 20 40 60 80 100

Ruvuma

Mbeya

Iringa

Lindi

Tanga

Pw ani

Dodoma

Mtw ara

Kagera

Rukw a

Singida

K/njaro

Tanzania Mainland

Mw anza

Tabora

Morogoro

Kigoma

Dar es salaam

Shinyanga

Manyara

Arusha

Mara

Reg

ion

Percent Map 6 presents similar extremes as the previous maps where the Lake Victoria zone, including Shinyanga, Kigoma and northern regions has the highest percent of public officials reporting that the Police force is completely dishonest and/or dishonest. Again south western zone had the lowest percent. The northern zone, including Morogoro region show the same pattern as the Lake Victoria zone.

47

Map 6: Percent reporting The Police Force completely dishonest and / or dishonest.

Figure 53 give bar charts for District/Primary Court Magistrates. There are significant variations across regions, in this case Mara region showing the worst situation and the best situation being expressed by Ruvuma region.

48

Figure 53: Percent reporting District/Primary courts ‘Completely dishonest and /or dishonest.

0 20 40 60 80 100

Ruvuma

Iringa

Mbeya

Tanga

Lindi

Mtw ara

K/njaro

Pw ani

Kagera

Rukw a

Tabora

Tanzania Mainland

Singida

Dodoma

Mw anza

Kigoma

Dar es salaam

Shinyanga

Morogoro

Manyara

Arusha

Mara

Reg

ion

Percent Map 7 presents the situation in District and Primary courts. Again, the pattern is the same for the zone with public officials showing the lowest percent as map 6 above.

49

Map 7: Percent reporting District/Primary courts ‘Completely dishonest and /or dishonest.

Figure 54 give bar charts for the Ministry of Lands. The worst situation is in Arusha region and the best inIringa region.

50

Figure 54: Percent reporting ministry of Lands completely dishonest and / or dishonest

0 20 40 60 80

Iringa

Ruvuma

Kagera

Lindi

Mbeya

Mara

Mtw ara

Rukw a

Pw ani

Tanga

Mw anza

Shinyanga

Tanzania Mainland

K/njaro

Tabora

Morogoro

Dodoma

Dar es salaam

Singida

Kigoma

Manyara

Arusha

Reg

ion

Percent Map 8 presents a similar pattern for the south western highlands zone showing that the

public officials reported lowest percent with the opinion that the ministry of Lands is

completely dishonest and/or dishonest. For this ministry it is the central belt zone,

including Kigoma, Tabora, Singida, Arusha, Manyara, Dodoma and Morogoro regions

which registered the highest percent.

51

Map 8: Percent reporting ministry of Lands completely dishonest and / or dishonest

52

CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 CONCLUSIONS The Public Officials survey was carried out to find the environment under which those entrusted with the task to deliver public services operate with special emphasis on assessing public sector governance and corruption. The survey examined public employee perceptions. The following are conclusions in a span of nine areas and these include ‘Perception as to Scope and Structure of Corruption’, ‘Service Quality and Integrity of Key Public Agencies’, ‘Corruption and Development’. Other areas are ‘Severity of and Trends in Corruption’, ‘Sources and Patterns of Corruption’, ‘Major Factors Influencing Personnel Recruitment’. The rest are ‘Management and Reward System’, ‘Fighting Corruption - Assessing the Diffusion and Scope of Corruption’, ‘Fighting Corruption - Political Will’ and ‘Fighting Corruption - Institutional Support’. The conclusions are summarised as follows:

1. Public officials have a common understanding and they mostly relate the word corruption to ‘unofficial payments’, ‘demand for sex’ (which mainly relate to petty corruption) and ‘abuse of power’ (which mainly relate to grand corruption), in that order. This perception of corruption is undifferentiated by public officials’ gender, age, salary level, or whether the public employee has other sources of income or not

2. Public officials seem to confirm that the requisite legal and regulatory

frameworks are already in place and that a firm foundation for ensuring good governance exists. However, clearly, these are habitually violated.

3. The survey has identified institutions that can be taken as role models, or be encouraged to play

the role of ‘champions’ in the fight against corruption. The survey also identifies institutions where proportionately more effort needs to be directed. Conversely, these institutions now have a basis for soliciting more resources to fight corruption within their organisations

4. Public officials purport to ‘disagree’ with the statements that ‘some decisions are

based on nepotism considerations’ and ‘some decisions are based on religious considerations’. Since both nepotism and religious considerations in decision making processes are linked to corrupt practises, these responses are not reliable.

5. Since as high as one third (32.5 percent) of public servants were obliged to give a

bribe to get services and out of those who recorded giving a bribe, as high as 86. 8 percent reported that what they gave in exchange for what they wanted was money is proof enough that public servants are accustomed to bribe giving.

6. Public officials consider both petty and grand corruption as being very harmful. Further, when

compared with other problems in Tanzania, corruption is considered a major problem and that corruption, having gradually increased to very high levels over the years, have now expressed the need for instituting stern measures.

53

7. Public officials indicated by as high as over two thirds (69.6 percent) of the cases,

when it comes to who usually initiates a bribe: it is the service provider. 8. Response form public officials rank the top three most serious problems currently affecting

Tanzania as ‘high cost of living’ and/or ‘inflation’ and ‘corruption in public services’ in that order

9. The response that as high as three quarters (76.7 percent) of public officials are not aware of the number of public contracts where illegal payments was used in order to secure the awarding of contracts and that as high as 14.8 percent of them are even of the opinion that there are no such contracts where illegal payments was used is, quite simply, unbelievable!

10. Public officials recognize the strategic importance of information management as a tool for good

governance and effective means of combating grand corruption

4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Public institutions should be required to demonstrate that they strictly follow the axisting legal and regulatory framework

2. Proportionately more resources should be channelled by the Government to

MDAs displaying low level of integrity so as to address recruitment, internal restructuring, competence level enhancement and capacity building

3. The Government must demonstrably take stern measures against those public

servants who perpetrate corruption. 4. The Government and its complement of public servants need to instil the culture

of ‘information management’, to monitor and evaluate, on a regular basis, the compliance level of its existing regulations.

5. The Government needs to put in place an effective complaint mechanism to

enable ordinary citizens to expose those public officials who act with impunity and with utter disregard as to laid down regulations.

54

REFERENCES Centre for Democracy and Development – Ghana (2000): The Ghana Governance and

Corruption Survey – Evidence from Households, Enterprises and Public Officials, CDD – Ghana Accra.

FACEIT and ESRF (2002): The State of Corruption Report – Annual Report, Dar es

Salaam. Government of Kenya (2007): National Corruption Perception Survey; Kenya Anti –

Corruption Commission, Nairobi. Government of Malawi (2005); Governance and Corruption Baseline Survey, Millennium

Consulting Group Ltd, Lilongwe. Government of Nigeria (no year); Governance and Corruption Diagnostic Survey –

Analysis of Survey Results, Households, Enterprises and Public Officials, Lagos Government of Sierra Leone (no year): Governance and Corruption Study, CDMA/GRS

I; Freetown. Government of Zambia (no year): Corruption Survey Report: Zambia National

Governance Baseline Survey – Executive Summary, Lusaka. Kaufmann, D et al (2008): Governance Indicators, World Bank Washington D C. Political Economy Centre (2000): Corruption in the public Sector in Thailand;

Chulalongkorn University Bangkok. The United Republic of Tanzania (1999): The National Anti – Corruption Strategy and

Action Plan for Tanzania; President’s Office State House Dar es Salaam. The United Republic of Tanzania (2006): The National Anti – Corruption Strategy and

Sector Specific Action Plans for all Ministries, Independent Government departments and Executive Agencies Phase II 2006 – 2010, President’s Office State House Dar es Salaam

USAID, nola and PCCB (2007): Yajue Makosa ya Rushwa Yaliyoainishwa Katika Sheria

ya Kuzuia na Kupambana na Rushwa Namba 11 ya 2007

55

UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

THE 2009 NATIONAL GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION SURVEY

PUBLIC OFFICIALS SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

CONFIDENTIAL

IDENTIFICATION

REGION ……………………………………………………………………………….

DISTRICT ……………………………………………………………………..

NAME OF ORGANIZATION …………………………………….

BRANCH...…..……………………………………………………….

EXECUTIVE = 1; LEGISLATVE = 2; JUDICIAL = 3; PARASTATAL = 4; OTHER = 5

Code number ……………………………………………………….

VISIT 1 VISIT 2 VISIT 3

Date of Interview ________________ __________________ _________________

Interviewer Name __________________________________________

56

Supervisor Office Editor

Name ________________ Date ________ Name _________________ Date ________

DATA PROCESSING

Keyed in by: Name Date

----/----/2009

READ THE FOLLOWING TO THE RESPONDENT

Good Morning/good afternoon; I am __________________ an interviewer from FRONT AGAINST CORRUPT ELEMENTS IN TANZANIA (FACEIT), an independent Civil Society Organisation and Consulting firm. We are conducting a study about opinions and interests of public officials in our country. The purpose of this study is to identify the practices that have developed within the public institutions related to the distribution of public services, specifically the understanding institution – specific determinants of corruption. All information received is strictly confidential. It is extremely important for us to maintain the confidentiality of your answers. Your participation will not be revealed under any circumstances, nor will your name be printed or divulged in any document. Each official interviewed will have a code assigned and the data gathered will be compared with other answers. None of the questionnaires will be revealed to any person or entity. This survey will be conducted and processed by (FACEIT), and its results will be used by the Government, the Development Partners and Civil Society for the design of an integration of a national strategy to fight against corruption. Most questions require you to give your opinion about the issue that I am going to ask you. Feel free to give your opinion because this survey is aiming at assisting the Government to improve the provision of public services to her people.

PART 1: GENERAL INFORMATION OF THE RESPONDENT

RECORD THE TIME WHEN YOU START THE INTERVIEW ______________________

101. RECORD THE SEX OF THE RESPONDENT

MALE 1 FEMALE 2

(Now I am going to ask you a few starting questions about yourself)

102. How old are you? YEARS

103. What is your marital status? (CIRCLE APPROPRIATE NUMBER)

57

Single 1 Married 2 Widowed 3 Divorced/separated 4

104. What is the highest level of education you have attained?

PRIMARY 1 TRAINING AFTER PRIMARY 2 SECONDARY 3 TRAINING AFTER SECONDARY 4 COLLEGE/UNIVERSITY 5 POST GRADUATE STUDIES 6

105. What is your current position in the society or Institution in which you are employed? (CIRCLE APPROPRIATE NUMBER)

POSITION CODE POSITION CODE

Member of Parliament 1 National Audit Office Officer 7

Regional or District politician 2

Tanzania Revenue Authority Officer 8

Institution’s Policy Maker 3

Public Procurement Regulatory Authority Officer 9

Institution’s Programme Manager 4

Local Government Council Officer 10

Institution’s Supporting Staff 5

Other selected Officers (refer to list at end of this questionnaire) 11

Judiciary Officer 6 Representative of junior staff 12

106. Which of these activities best describes your occupation in the institution where you work?

Policy Development 1

Direct Attention Services/Decisions 2

Administrative Processes 3

Procurement Position 4

Other (Specify) __________________________ 5

107. For how long have you worked in:

(i) The public sector? ……… years

(ii) The current organisation ………. years

(iii) The present position ……….. years

(iv) This Local Government Authority ……….. years

58

108. I will read to you salary ranges, please state in which range your current (year 2009) Gross monthly salary including allowances fall:

SALARY RANGE CODE

Up to Tshs 99,999/= 1

From Tshs 100,000/= to 299,999/= 2

From Tshs 300,000/= to 499,999/= 3

From Tshs 500,000/= to 749,999/= 4

From Tshs 750,000/= to 999,999/= 5

From Tshs 1,000,000/= to 1,499,999/= 6

From Tshs 1,500,000/= to 2,499,999/= 7

Tshs 2,500,000/= and above 8

Not Stated/No Response 9

109. Do you have any other source of income?

YES 1 NO 2

110. What was your main activity before entering the public sector? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

Own Private Business 01 Was a Student 05 Working in Private Sector 02 Was unemployed 06 Farmer 03 Independent Professional 07 Working with an NGO 04 OTHER (SPECIFY) _____________ 08

111. May you please tell me about the following?

111A. Your family size, including extended family members living with you.

111B. Do you or any member of your nucleus family (father, mother and their children) own a company or business?

YES 1 NO 2 (SKIP TO 112)

111C. What income is derived from the company/business as a percentage of total

family income? ____________%

59

112. What are your terms of Service? (i) Permanent and Pensionable 1

(ii) Contract 2 (iii) Internship/Attachment 3 (iv)Temporary/Casual 4 (v) Voluntary 5 (vi)Other (SPECIFY) ____________________ 6

113. How were you appointed to the present position? Through interview Chaired by Public Service Commission 1 Through interview by outsourced Firm or Committee 2 Through interview by Senior Management Official(s) 3 Through normal promotion 4 Through influence by friend/relative 5 As an Executive appointment 6 As a political appointment 7 Elected 8 Other (SPECIFY) _________________________________ 9

SECTION 2: CURRENT SITUATION ABOUT CORRUPTION IN TANZANIA 201. The word “Corruption” is sometimes difficult to define. Now I would like to ask you,

what do you understand when one mentions the word “corruption”? (CIRCLE ALL MENTIONED) DEMAND FOR UNOFFICIAL PAYMENT 01 TAKRIMA 02 BAKSHISH 03 DEMAND FOR FAVOUR 04 DEMAND FOR SEX 05 EMBEZZLEMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS 06 FRAUD 07 ABUSE OF POWER 08 OTHER (SPECIFY) _________________________________ 09 DOES NOT KNOW 99 (SKIP TO 203)

202. In your opinion, which three forms of corruption do you consider to be most serious in Tanzania?

(TRANSFER CODE NUMBER OF RESPONSE MENTIONED) ____________________________________________________   ____________________________________________________    

60

____________________________________________________ 

203. What types of corrupt practices do usually occur in your vicinity?

_______________________________________________ _______________________________________________

_______________________________________________ 204. Where do such corrupt practices occur?

_______________________________________________ _______________________________________________

_______________________________________________ 205. In your opinion, how does each of the following corruption affect society in general?

(CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

VERY HARMFUL

SOMEHOW HARMFUL

NOT HARMFUL DON’T KNOW

Petty corruption (Small) 1 2 3 9

Grand corruption (Big) 1 2 3 9

206. In your opinion, corruption in Tanzania when it is compared with other problems is:

A Major problem 1 A Moderate problem 2 A Minor problem 3 Not a problem at all 4 DON’T KNOW 9

207. From your personal perspective, would you consider the following to be the major causes

of corruption in Tanzania? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

CAUSE YES NO DON’T KNOW

01. Poverty 1 2 9

61

02. Greed/selfishness 1 2 9

03. High cost of living 1 2 9

04. Poor remuneration 1 2 9

05. Lack of control and accountability of public officials 1 2 9

06. Lack of independent and effective judiciary 1 2 9

07. Moral decency 1 2 9

08. Poor leadership 1 2 9

09. Lack of effective corruption reporting system 1 2 9

10. Poor law enforcement/punishment of the corrupt 1 2 9

11. Corruption gives better services 1 2 9

12. Other (SPECIFY) ___________________________ 1 2 9

208. In your opinion, would you strongly agree, agree, disagree or strongly disagree with the

following statements? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

STATEMENT STRONGLY AGREE

AGREE DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

DON’T KNOW

Bribery is a practical necessity for getting things done quickly 1 2 3 4 9

Corruption is beneficial provided you are not caught 1 2 3 4 9

Corruption gives better services 1 2 3 4 9

Following laid down procedures is too costly and time wasting 1 2 3 4 9

People who report corruption end up suffering the most 1 2 3 4 9

There is no point of reporting corruption because nothing will be done about it

1 2 3 4 9

Would not have received protection from possible retaliation

1 2 3 4 9

The case can not be proved 1 2 3 4 9

Do not want to betray anyone 1 2 3 4 9

62

209. From the following statements, in your opinion, who usually initiates a bribe?

1. A service provider indicates or asks for a payment 1 2. The service receiver offers a payment on his/her own accord 2 3. It is known before hand how to pay and how much to pay 3 4. An known agent is engaged to do the transaction 4 5. Do not know 9

210. Have you ever encountered a situation where you were obliged to give something in order that you get what you wanted?

YES 1 NO 2 GO TO 212

211. What did you give in exchange for what you wanted to get?

MONEY 1 PROPERTY 2 SEX 3 OTHER (SPECIFY) __________________________ 4

212. In the following questions, I will describe to you some situations that sometimes happen. In your opinion, how do you rate each action, would you consider it to be totally acceptable, somehow acceptable, somehow not acceptable or totally not acceptable? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

SITUATION TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE

SOMEHOW ACCEPTABLE

SOMEHOW NOT ACCEPTABLE

TOTALLY NOT ACCEPTABLE

01. In order to keep the car from being towed and avoid paying a fine, an offender offers to pay the Traffic Police Officer directly. The Officer had not asked for money, but he/she accepts it.

1 2 3 4

02. A government official uses a government car for personal business or leisure

1 2 3 4

03. A person is promoted thanks to a family or other intimate relationship with a high ranking official

1 2 3 4

213. We are going to propose a hypothetical situation. Suppose that one night, a little late in the

evening, you are walking in the parking lot of a shopping street/area/mall, the parking lot is empty, there is no security at this time and you are by yourself. Suddenly, you notice that there is an envelope on the ground. You pick it up and realize it contains 5 million shillings.

63

How probable is it that your reaction would be as follows? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

REACTION NOT PROBABLE AT ALL

NOT PROBABLE PROBABLE HIGHLY

PROBABLE

01. Since this money has no owner, this lucky break can help you with your family expenses.

1 2 3 4

02. You will take it home and think overnight about what to do with it. 1 2 3 4

03. Right away you look for a guard in order to report the incidence and give him the envelope with the money.

1 2 3 4

04. Knowing that whoever will be given the envelope will pocket it, better you take it.

214. I will read to you a list of problems. Please tell me how serious you consider each

problem to be. Let us use a scale from 1 to 4 where 1 means very serious problem; 2 means serious problem; and 3 means very minor problem. (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

PROBLEM VERY

SERIOUS SERIOUS VERY

MINOR

01. High cost of living 1 2 3

02. Unemployment 1 2 3

03. Inflation 1 2 3

04. Safety concerns/crime 1 2 3

05. Drug abuse 1 2 3

06. Drug trafficking 1 2 3

07. Lack of good leadership 1 2 3

08. Corruption in public services 1 2 3

09. Corruption in private sector 1 2 3

10. Cost of Education 1 2 3

11. Cost of Health services 1 2 3

12. Access to clean water 1 2 3

64

13. Food availability 1 2 3

14. Poor quality of roads 1 2 3

15. Police harassment 1 2 3

16 Unfair judicial system 1 2 3

17. Destruction of the environment

1 2 3

18. Political instability 1 2 3

19. Shortage of Housing 1 2 3

20. Gender stereotype type/bias 1 2 3

21. Violence 1 2 3

22 Delinquency 1 2 3

23. Any other problem? (Specify) 1 2 3

215. In your opinion, from the aforementioned problems, what do you think are the three most

serious problems affecting Tanzania? List them in order of importance among those I have read to you?

1st in importance ___________________________________________ 2nd in importance __________________________________________

3rd in importance __________________________________________ PART 3: MANAGEMENT OF PERSONNEL (INSTITUTION WHERE INTERVIEWEE WORKS)

(Thank you, and now I will turn and ask you a few questions regarding the management of personnel in your institution)

SECTION 3.1: POLICIES /GUIDELINES / REGULATIONS IN PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF THE POLICIES/GUIDELINES/REGULATIONs

301. Please evaluate to what extent you would agree or disagree with the statements below regarding decisions of your institution related to administration / policies / regulations of personnel management: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

(Use the scale from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates that you strongly disagree. 3 means that you are indifferent 5 means that you strongly agree).

65

Decisions about the management / policies /regulations of personnel in your Institution:

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE

01. Formal (i.e. written) 1 2 3 4 5 02. Simple, clear, easy to understand 1 2 3 4 5 03. Do not require an excessive

number of administrative steps 1 2 3 4 5

04. Stable (do not change or are not always being rewritten) 1 2 3 4 5

05. Well supervised (managers make sure that the rules are followed) 1 2 3 4 5

06. Strictly Applied (non-compliance always leads to negative consequences for those who do not follow the rules)

1 2 3 4 5

07. The rules are considered useful for the objectives of the institution and their application creates institutional benefits

1 2 3 4 5

08. Agreed Performance Targets and Measurement Criteria are simple, clear and easy to understand

1 2 3 4 5

09. Right information about job description is given and is fully understood

1 2 3 4 5

10. Some decisions are based on nepotism considerations 1 2 3 4 5

11. Some decisions are based on religious considerations 1 2 3 4 5

PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE IMPLEMENT ATION OF POLICIES /GUIDELINES / REGULATIONS 302. During the last two financial years, to what extent were you in agreement with the statements

below regarding decisions related to personnel management (hiring, assignments, changes, promotions, salary increases) in your Institution? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

To what extent were the decisions on human resources:

STRONGLY

DISAGREEDISAGREE

INDIFFERENT AGRE

E

STRONGLY AGREE

01. Made in a transparent manner (know who

were assigned, promoted, transferred, or received wage increases and why).

1 2 3 4 5

02. Revealing positions falling vacant within the institution as well as announced publicly outside the institution (when appropriate)

1 2 3 4 5

03. Useful for the improvement of institutional efficiency 1 2 3 4 5

66

04. Subjected to regular audits by the internal unit of control 1 2 3

4

5

05. Are subject to regular external audits performed by professionals qualified and experienced in conducting audits

1

2

3

4

5

06. There is a system of evaluating jobs and Compensating employees

1

2

3

4

5

07. Peers at the work place rate the compensation system as effective

1

2

3

4

5

08. Subject to a formal procedure of appeal 1 2 3 4 5 09. Based on specific criteria defined in

writing (as opposed to tacit - not written - 1 2 3 4 5

10. Based on a process specifically defined in writing 1 2 3 4 5

11. Based on professional experience/ merit /performance 1 2 3 4 5

12. Based on level of education 1 2 3 4 5 13. Based on seniority / age 1 2 3 4 5 14. Based on family ties, friendship or

acquaintance 1 2 3

4

5

15. Influenced by business ties/associations 1 2 3 4 5 16. Based on political ties / political

affiliations / political pressure 1 2 3 4 5

17. Based on influential connections within the institution 1 2 3 4 5

18. Influenced by illegal payments (purchase of positions or promotions) 1 2 3 4 5

19. Due to administration changes within the Institution 1 2 3 4 5

20. Likely to favour female staff 1 2 3 4 5

SECTION 3.2: GENERAL WORK SATISFACTION

303. Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following expressions: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

GENERAL SATISFACTION WITH OCCUPATION AND COMPENSATION:

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE

STRONGLY

AGREE

01. To work in the public sector is better than to work in the private 1 2 3 4 5

02. My salary and benefits are very satisfactory

1

2

3

4

5

03. My standard of living (personal economic standing) has improved due to my salary increase

1

2

3

4

5

04. I have nowhere else to go 1 2 3 4 5

67

304. In your opinion, to what extent do you agree with the following expressions?

(CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

REASONS TO WORK IN THIS INSTITUTION:

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE

INDIFFERENT

AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE

01. Because of stability / job security 1 2 3 4 5 02. Because of learning / training

opportunities 1 2 3 4

5

03. Because of conviction or personal satisfaction with public sector work 1 2 3 4 5

04. Because of social status 1 2 3 4 5 05. Because of the level of influence and

access to other opportunities 1 2 3 4 5

06. Because of the relationships being established and/or experience being gained for future work in the private

1 2 3 4 5

07. Because opportunities outside the public sector are limited 1 2 3 4 5

08. Never found a reason to leave 1 2 3 4 5 09. I have considerable spare time to work

on personal things 1 2 3 4 5

SECTION 3.3: TRAINING

305. Please evaluate the frequency of offering training opportunities, communication of training opportunities to employees and criteria of offering training to staff. (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

TRAINING IN PUBLIC INSTITUTION NEVER HAPPEN

S

SOMETIMES HAPPENS

ALWAYS HAPPEN

S

DON’T KNOW

01. Skills, knowledge and ability considered in offering training to staff 1 2 3 4

02. All training opportunities communicated to employees 1 2 3 4

03. How frequently does the institution offer training opportunities 1 2 3 4

306. Please evaluate: How effective are the training opportunities offered by your institution at improving your work performance. : NOT EFFECTIVE 1 EFFECTIVE 2 VERY EFFECTIVE 3 DON’T KNOW 4 SECTION 3.4: PAYMENT OF WAGES

307. During the last two financial years how frequently did you receive your payment late? :

68

NEVER 1 RARELY 2 FREQUENTLY 3 VERY FRFEQUENTLY 4

PART 4: BUDGET ADMINISTRATION

Thank you, and I will now turn and ask you a few questions regarding the administration of budget or finances in your institution.

SECTION 4.1: POLICIES / GUIDELINES / REGULATIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE BUDGET

PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF POLICIES/GUIDELINES/REGULATIONS

401. Please evaluate to what extent you and your colleagues would agree that the policies /

guidelines and regulations of the administration of the budget are: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

The budget administration decisions are:

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT

AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE

01. Formal (i.e. written) 1 2 3 4 5 02. Simple, clear, easy to understand 1 2 3 4 5 03. Do not require an

excessive number of 1 2 3 4 5

04. Stable (do not change or are not always being rewritten) 1 2 3 4 5

05. Well supervised (managers make sure that the rules are 1 2 3 4 5

06. Strictly Applied 1 2 3 4 5 07. Based on the rules presented in

the General Plan for Public Accountability

1 2 3 4 5

08. The rules are considered useful for the objectives of the institution and their application creates institutional b fit

1 2 3 4 5

PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICIES /GUIDELINES/

REGULATIONS 402. During the last two financial years to what extent would you agree that the statements below

regarding decisions relating to the budget administration (amounts assigned to the budget, services, programs which were carried out, groups that received budget allocations) have been: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

69

The budget administration decisions were:

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE

STRONGLY

AGREE

01. Done transparently (we know who received what and why) 1 2 3 4 5

02. Announced and open to public knowledge through various legal 1 2 3 4 5

03. Subjected to regular audits by the internal control unit 1 2 3 4 5

04. Subject to regular external audits performed by professionals qualified and experienced in

1 2 3 4 5

05. Based on specific criteria defined in writing (as opposed to tacit – not 1 2 3 4 5

06. Based on purely technical criteria 1 2 3 4 5 07. Influenced by regional ties 1 2 3 4 5 08. Based on political ties / political affiliations / political pressure 1 2 3 4 5

09. Based on influential connections within the institution 1 2 3 4 5

10. Influenced by illegal payments 1 2 3 4 5 11. Due to administration changes within the Institution 1 2 3 4 5

Planned with consideration given to institutional �ulfilment

1 2 3 4

5

Subject to unforeseen reductions that affected their proper execution 1 2 3 4 5

403. To what extent would you be in agreement with the following expressions? : (CIRCLE AS

APPROPRIATE)

EXPRESSIONS

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE

INDIFFERENT

AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE

01. It is possible to influence the amount of the budget assigned to where you work in the institution

1 2 3 4 5

02. Receipts for the different transactions are saved in hard copy for use during internal or external audits

1 2 3 4 5

03. The operating processes such as accounting, budget, payments, etc. are integrated in order to achieve efficiency in the financial area

1 2 3 4 5

04. The entity/institution divulges its quarterly financial reports to the general public 1 2 3 4 5

70

05. Internal control systems are in place in order to protect the resources of this entity/institution against loss or inappropriate use

1 2 3 4 5

06. Third party payments made by the institution are made in a manner that respects the order in which the invoice was received

1 2 3 4 5

SECTION 4.2: PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE RESOURCES NECESSARY FOR INSTITUTIONAL OPERATION

404. Please evaluate how frequently the following resources fulfil your needs as well as the needs of your

Peers in your institution to allow you to complete your activities successfully? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

RESOURCES: NEVER SOMETIMES ALWAYS

01. Amount of budgetary resources 1 2 3

02. Properly qualified personnel 1 2 3

03. Office equipment / Computers 1 2 3

04. Space / Offices / Physical plants 1 2 3

PART 5: PERFORMANCE AND/OR PROVISION OF SERVICES (Thank you, and now I will turn and ask you a few questions relating to the performance and/or provision of services in your institution)

SECTION 5.1: MOTIVATION / IDENTIFICATION / GOALS / MISSION / STRATEGIES

501. Please indicate to what extent you and your colleagues in the institution would be in agreement with the following expressions: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

In the Institution where you work: STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE STRONGLY

AGREE 01. All levels of public servants have a clear idea of the Institution’s objectives and strategies

1 2 3 4 5

02. All levels of public servants consider the citizens and users of public services, without discrimination, as your clients

1 2 3 4 5

03. All levels of public servants identify with, and are involved with the institutions’ objectives and strategies

1 2 3 4 5

71

04. For all levels of public servants, there are incentives to improve the quality of services rendered

1 2 3 4 5

05. You clearly understand your institutional roles and responsibilities and what duties comprise each role

1 2 3 4 5

06. The purchasing plan is considered an important planning exercise and takes into consideration the investment plans of the institution and its inventory requirements

1 2 3 4 5

07. The budget is an effective tool for planning and executing the plans and strategies of the institution

1 2 3 4 5

SECTION 5.2: PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF INSTITUTIONS AND THE ECISION MAKING PROCESS

502. Please indicate to what extent you are in agreement with the following statements?

(CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

STATEMENT STRONGLY

DISAGREEDISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE

01. At the Institution where you work, there are too many levels in the decision-making process

1 2 3 4 5

02. At the Institution where you work, the decision making processes are too centralized

1 2 3 4 5

SECTION 5.3: PERCEPTION ABOUT TIME MANAGEMENT

503. How frequently do you believe that a public official such as yourself must engage in other work

activities, say in the private sector because the salary in the public sector is not sufficient to make a living?

NEVER HAPPENED 1 RARELY HAPPENED 2 SOMETIMES 3 FREQUENT 4 VERY FREQUENT 5 DON’T KNOW 9

SECTION 5.4: FULFILLMENT OF OBJECTIVES AND REFORMS

72

PERCEPTION ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTA TION OF POLICIES /GUIDELINES / REGULATIONS

504. In relation to the development of the daily activities, tasks and functions during the

implementation of the services, to what extent would you agree with the following statements? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE

At the institution where you work: STRONGLY

DISAGREEDISAGREE INDIFFERENT

AGREE

STRONGLY

AGREE 01. There exist clearly defined

mechanisms that take into consideration the feedback and needs of the users

1 2 3 4 5

02. There exist clearly defined mechanisms that channel user’s complaints as well as their preferences

1 2 3 4 5

03. Receipts for the different transactions are saved in hard copy for use during internal or external audits.

1 2 3 4 5

505. During the last two financial years, to what extent would you have been in agreement with the statements below regarding decisions made by your institution during the development of procurement (contracts for goods, works and services) procedures? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

The decisions in the procurement (contracts for goods, works and services) process were:

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE

01. Done transparently (we know who was awarded what and why) 1 2 3 4 5

02. Public and open to the knowledge of and suggestions from the users 1 2 3 4 5

03. Subjected to regular audits by the internal control unit

1

2

3

4

5

04. Subjected to regular external audits performed by professionals qualified and experienced in conducting audits

1 2 3 4 5

05. Based on specific criteria defined in writing (as opposed to tacit – not written – and informal rules)

1 2 3 4 5

06. Based on the direct evaluations of the directors/managers immediately involved in the matter (free from excessive bureaucratic steps)

1 2 3 4 5

73

07. Based on competition and technical criteria

1

2

3

4

5

08. Based on regional preferences 1 2 3 4 5 09. Based on political ties / political

affiliations / political pressure 1 2 3 4 5

10. Based on influential connections within the institution

1

2

3

4

5

11. Influenced by illegal payments 1 2 3 4 5 12. Done with the knowledge of the existence of

conflict of interest 1 2 3 4 5

506. In relation to the contracting processes, to what extent would you agree with the following statements? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

ISSUE

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE

1.The entity has taken deliberate efforts to publicly announce its purchasing plans in accordance with the existing regulations

1 2 3 4 5

2. The entity has consistently complied with the Public Procurement Act and its Regulations 1 2 3 4 5

3. To consistently comply with the Public Procurement Act and its Regulations has not completely eliminated awarding contracts to

1 2 3 4 5

SECTION 5.5: PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SERVICES

507. Please evaluate, to what extent you would agree that the services offered by institution are:

(CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

SERVICES OFFERED BY YOUR INSTITUTION:

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE

01. Are of high quality 1 2 3 4 5

02. Are performed according to informal (not written) rules

1 2 3

4

5

03. Are offered at relatively low cost 1 2 3 4 5

04. Fully satisfy the user’s needs 1 2 3 4 5

05. Are accessible by the poor 1 2 3 4 5

SECTION 5.6: PERCEPTION OF DISCRETION USED DURING THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS

74

508. Please evaluate to what extent the following groups of people perform their duties according to consistently applied institutional policies and rules, (i.e. using institutional criteria and not arbitrarily applied criteria) (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

Frequency of decisions made in a discretionary manner by: NEVER SOMETIMES ALWAYS

01. Employees who you supervise 1 2 3

02. Employees who supervise you 1 2 3

03. You / Your peers 1 2 3 509. Please evaluate the following statement: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

STATEMENT STRONGLY

DISAGREE DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

01. Your colleagues, as well as yourself at the work place enjoy ample freedom and discretionary power in the daily performance of your jobs.

1 2 3 4 5

02. Your colleagues, as well as yourself at the work place are prudent and follow organisational norms in the daily performance of duties

1 2 3 4 5

SECTION 5.7: PERCEPTION ON CITIZEN SUPPORT TO PUBLC SECTOR REFORMS 510. Do you think the government has the full support of the following persons in implementing public

sector reforms? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

Constituent of Persons Yes No Don’t Know

01. Public officials 1 2 3 02. The general public 1 2 3

511. If answer is NO to any response to Question 510, in your opinion state reasons

1. ……………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

2. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………..

3. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………….

75

. PART 6: INFORMATION MANAGEMENT (Thank you, and now I will turn and ask you a few questions relating to the area of information management) 601. Please evaluate the following statements (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

Decisions about the management/policies /regulations of personnel in your Institution:

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

01. Systems that provide information about public official productivity are scarce and insufficient

1 2 3 4 5

02. People affected by broad public sector decisions are the last to know about them

1 2 3 4 5

03. When directors/managers make decisions, they never take into consideration their subordinates’ opinions

1 2 3 4 5

04. The institution does not have an adequate system for recording managerial decisions.

1 2 3 4 5

05. Executive decisions do not take into consideration the financial requirements of the institution.

1 2 3 4 5

PART 7: REFORMS 701. Please indicate to what extent you would be in �ulfil of the following types of reforms: (circle number)

REFORMS AGAINST INDIFFERENT

IN FAVOR DON’T KNOW

01. Establish a public service career structure in which job assignments, salary increases and promotions are based on defined job performance criteria

1 2 3 4

02. A decrease in the number of public officials if salary and benefits are increased 1 2 3 4

03. Decentralization of state administrations, delegating operational functions of the national government to the Local Government Administrations

1 2 3 4

04. Greater control given to the public and civil society over public sector activities 1 2 3 4

05. Rationalization of budgetary increases 1 2 3 4 06. Privatization of public sector services 1 2 3 4

76

07. Establish effective mechanisms for allowing citizens free access to all information held by the state 1 2 3 4

08. A law that ensures that economic resources used by political parties will have their origin and final use clearly 1 2 3 4

09. A public servant statute regulating the application of penalties and rewards according to job completion 1 2 3 4

10. Strengthen the operational management (output oriented) 1 2 3 4 11. Simplifying administrative procedures 1 2 3 4 12. Establishing objectives and norms for fulfilment of services 1

2

3

4

13. Declaration of assets by public officials 1

2

3

4

PART 8: GOVERNABILITY (Thank you and I will now turn and ask you a few questions relating to governance)

SECTION 8.1: PERCEPTION ABOUT CORRUPTION

801. In many of the countries of the world one can find as a common practice that companies and people from the community pay “bribes” or make payments “under the table” to public servants. What is your perception about the proportion of public service procurement (goods, works and services), etc. that are affected by these types of illegal payments and other types of irregular practices? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

PUBLIC SECTOR WIDELY SPREAD

HALF OF THE

CASES

NON-EXISTENT

01. Today 1 2 3 02. Two years ago 1 2 3 03. Five years ago 1 2 3 04. Expectation in the next two years to come 1 2 3

802. Please evaluate, how widely spread are these practices among local businessmen? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

LOCAL BUSINESSMAN WIDELY SPREAD HALF OF THE CASES

NON EXISTENCE

01. Today 1 2 3

77

02. Two years ago 1 2 3 03. Five years ago 1 2 3 04. Expectation in the next two years to come 1 2 3

803. Please evaluate: How widely spread are these practices among foreign investors/Businessmen: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

FOREING INVESTORS/BUSINESSMAN WIDELY SPREAD HALF OF THE

CASES NON

EXISTENCE 01. Today 1 2 3 02. Two years ago 1 2 3 03. Five years ago 1 2 3 04. Expectation in the next two

years to come 1 2 3

804. Please evaluate: How widely spread are these practices among International Cooperating Partners /Lending Agencies (Multilateral/Bilateral Agencies, UN Agencies etc): (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATING PARTNER

WIDELY SPREAD

HALF OF THE CASES

NON EXISTENCE

01. Today 1 2 3 02. Two years ago 1 2 3 03. Five years ago 1 2 3 04. Expectation in the next two years

to come 1 2 3

805. Please evaluate: How widely spread are these practices among NGOs

(CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

NGOs WIDELY SPREAD

HALF OF THE CASES

NON EXISTENCE

01. Today 1 2 3 02. Two years ago 1 2 3 03. Five years ago 1 2 3 04. Expectation in the next two years to come 1 2 3

78

806. In many of the countries of the world one can find as a common practice that companies and people from the community pay "bribes" or make payments "under the table" for public services or in order to improve the quality of service. Using the following scale, please evaluate: "To what extent does this practice exist in the institution in which you work?" (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

INSTITUTION WHERE THE INTERVIEWEE WORKS WIDELY

SPREAD HALF OF THE

CASES NON

EXISTENCE 01. Today 1 2 3 02. Two years ago 1 2 3 03. Five years ago 1 2 3 04. Expectation in the next two years to come 1 2 3

807. In your opinion, in what year or time period was corruption the most prevalent in this country? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

TIME PERIOD WIDELY SPREAD

HALF OF THE CASES

NON EXISTENCE

First Phase Government (1961 to 1985) 1 2 3

Second Phase Government (1985 to 1995) 1 2 3

Third Phase Government (1995 to 2005) 1 2 3

Fourth Phase Government (2005 to current) 1 2 3

808. How widely spread is the following practices in the institution in which you work? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

PRACTICES WIDELY SPREAD

HALF OF THE CASES

NON EXISTENCE

01. Bribes to obtain public services 1 2 3 02. Bribes to alter regulatory and legal decisions 1 2 3

03. Bribes in the procurement (goods, works and services) process 1 2 3

809 In many of the countries in the world, there are known to be different actors and groups in the

private sector that apply pressure on the government through the payment of bribes to further their own interests. Using the same scale, tell me to what extent the following forms of

79

corruption have a significant impact on the business environment of this country? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

FORMS OF CORRUPTION VERY

SIGNIFICANT

SOMEWHAT SIGNIFICANT

NOT SIGNIFICANT

NOT STATED/ NO

RESPONSE

01. Bribes to employees of the Bank of Tanzania in order to ensure that their private interests are favoured by bank decisions

1 2 3 4

02. Fees, Gifts and/or Bribes to elected representatives ( Members of Parliament) to ensure that particular laws and

1 2 3 4

03. Bribes to public officials to ensure that presidential or ministerial decisions favour their interests

1 2 3 4

04. Bribes to regulatory commission Officials or supervising agencies to ensure

specific group interests 1

2

3

4

05. Bribes directed to the authorities of the local council to favour private interests 1 2 3 4

06. Bribes to judicial authorities to revert a ruling or decision and benefit particular interests 1 2 3 4

810. Would you please tell me in what capacity or domain would the following actors have to influence, through bribes, the decisions made by top state officials. ? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

INFLUENTIAL ACTORS

HIGH CAPACITY

SOME CAPACITY

LOW CAPACITY

NOT STATED/NO RESPONSE

01. Chambers of Commerce 1 2 3 9

02. Trade Unions 1 2 3 9

03. Professional Associations 1 2 3 9

04. Board registering professionals 1 2 3 9

05. Other Pressure/lobby groups 1 2 3 9

06. Multinational companies 1 2 3 9

07. Unscrupulous Businessmen 1 2 3 9

08. The Media 1 2 3 9

09. Other groups of organized crime

1 2 3 9

SECTION 8.2: PERCEPTION ABOUT THE MECHANISMS OF CORRUPTION

80

811. From the corruption cases that you have knowledge of either directly or indirectly, which would you say occurs most frequently for each of the three cases? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

CORRUPTION The public official would

insinuate that a bribe must be paid

The service user offers the bribe

Normally, the groups know how the process works and how much

money they need to pay

01. With the service user 1 2 3

02. With a local company 1 2 3

03. With a foreign company 1 2 3

812. From the corruption cases you have been aware of either directly or indirectly, how frequently do you think the person would share the bribe? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

With whom the bureaucrat would share the bribes with: NEVER SOMETIMES ALWAYS

01. Their superiors 1 2 3

02. Their colleagues 1 2 3

03. A Member of Parliament/ Other Politician / Political Party 1 2 3

813. From the corruption cases that you know about either directly or indirectly, public officials increase their salaries with extra unofficial payments (bribes), which they receive when they perform their tasks. How significant is the amount of income received from bribes when compared to their total income (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

For:

NOT SIGNIFICANT

SOMEWHAT SIGNIFICANT

VERY SIGNIFICANT

01. Your co- workers' superiors (people with a higher rank than you, without including your supervisors) 1 2 3

02. Co-workers (people at the same level as your, without including yourself) 1 2 3

03. Subordinates of your colleagues (people at a lower level than you, not including your subordinates)

1 2 3

814. In many countries of the world, we know that many of the public officials pay to "buy" positions in the public sector. Based on your direct or indirect experience, and using the same scale, tell me how significant do you believe that these practices are prevalent among the following groups of people: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

For: NOT

SIGNIFICANT SOMEWHAT

SIGNIFICANT VERY

SIGNIFICANT

81

01. Your colleagues' superiors (people at a higher level than your, not including your superiors) 1 2 3

02. Co-workers (people at your same level, not including yourself) 1 2 3

03. Your colleagues' subordinates (people at a lower level than you, not including your

b di t )1 2 3

SECTION 8.3: PERCEPTIONS ABOUT CAUSES OF CORRUPTION AND MECHANISMS

FOR REPORTING ACTS OF CORRUPTION: 815. During the last two financial years, did you consider reporting a case of corruption, but

decide not to do it? YES 1 NO 2

816. Many people know about cases of corruption but do not report them. If you or any of your peers decided to report a case of corruption, what would be your motive for doing it? Specify how important the following factors would be in your decision. (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

Not report a case of corruption because: COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT

IRRELEVANT

EXTREMELY IMPORTANT

01. Nobody knows the reporting procedure 1 2 3 02. Nobody can prove anything 1 2 3 03. The cases are never investigated or punished 1 2 3 04. Under the current economic situation, illegal

payments are sometimes justified 1 2 3

05. What is deemed as corruption in other countries is normally accepted in our culture 1 2 3

06. There is no protection for possible reprisals against those who report corruption 1 2 3

07. The cases are so trivial that it is not worthwhile to report them 1 2 3

08. People perceive that filing a complaint against a public official is like betraying a colleague 1 2 3

09. Fear of recrimination or other negative consequences (whistle blowers) 1 2 3

817. Please evaluate the following positions: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

THE PROCESS FOR REPORTING CASES OF CORRUPTION

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

01. Difficult and time consuming

1 2 3 4 5 02. Implies personal security

risks 1 2 3 4 5

82

03. Politicized 1 2 3 4 5 04. A threat to the interests of

politicians 1 2 3 4 5

05. Wastage of time 1 2 3 4 5 06. A threat to the interest of

powerful businessman 1 2 3 4 5

07. A threat to job security 1 2 3 4 5

SECTION 8.4: PERCEPTION ABOUT IRREGULARITIES / MISAPPROPRIATION OF FUNDS 818. During the last two financial years, in the use of budget funds in your institution, how frequently

were there irregularities such as misappropriation of funds or any other type of abuse of budget resources?

Never 1 Frequently 2 Very frequently 3 DON’T KNOW 9

819. In your opinion, in the last two financial years, what percentage of the institutional budget was misused as a consequence of fraudulent practices, irregularities or any other type of public service abuse? : (ENTER PERCENT, IF DON’T KNOW CIRCLE 999)

___________ % DON’T KNOW 999 820. What type of Audit Report was awarded in the last financial year by the Controller and

Auditor General to your institution?

Unqualified (Clean) 1 Qualified (Issues to be refined) 2 Disclaimer (Services and pending items to be revisited) 3 Adverse Opinion (Bad) 4 Unable to express opinion 5 DON’T KNOW 9

SECTION 8.5: PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE AWARDING MECHANISMS OF

PUBLIC CONTRACTS 821. What percent of the number of public contracts (goods, works and services) were illegal payments used in order to secure the awarding of contracts? (ENTER PERCENT, IF DON’T KNOW CIRCLE 999) ___________ % DON’T KNOW 999

822. When an illegal payment is made in relation to the awarding of public contracts, what

percentage of the total value of the contract do you think is paid in order to be awarded the contract? (ENTER PERCENT, IF DON’T KNOW CIRCLE 999)

83

___________ % DON’T KNOW 999

823 Would you be able to tell me how frequently the following have occurred in contracting

(goods, works or services) cases? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

TYPE OF INCIDENCE

NOT FREQUENTLY

SOMEWHAT FREQUENTLY

VERY FREQUENTLY

01. Technical deviation of the contract 1 2 3

02. Contractor monopolies/carteling 1 2 3

03. Modifying the terms of the contract to favour the interest of a company 1 2 3

04. Contracting with fictitious/nonexistent companies 1 2 3

05. Presenting offers from non-existent competitors 1 2 3

06. Modification of the terms of the contract during the execution stage 1 2 3

07. Bribery to award contract 1 2 3

08. Bid rigging 1 2 3

824. Would you be able to tell me about the expected quality in execution of contracts which were

involved in corrupt practices (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE) Expected quality surpassed 1 No change in Expected quality 2 Expected quality adversely affected 3 Don’t know 4

PART 9: PERCEPTION OF THE NATIONAL SITUATION

901 I am going to read to you a list of problems so that you can tell me how serious each one is.: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

(READ ONE PROBLEM AT A TIME AND ASK THE RESPONDENT TO RATE THE SERIOUSNESS OF EACH)

PROBLEMS VERY SERIOUS SERIOUS VERY TRIVIAL

01. High Cost of Living 1 2 3 02. Consumption of drugs/ drug abuse 1 2 3 03. Drug Trafficking 1 2 3

84

04. Delinquency 1 2 3 05. Violence 1 2 3 06. Corruption in Public services 1 2 3 07. Corruption in Private sector 1 2 3 08. Unemployment 1 2 3 09. Cost of education 1 2 3 10. Cost of health services 1 2 3 11. Shortage of housing 1 2 3 12. Public Services (cost, quality, availability) 1 2 3 13. Public Utilities (cost, quality, availability) 1 2 3 14. Quality of roads 1 2 3 15. Destruction of the environment 1 2 3 16. Lack of good Leadership 1 2 3 17. National security 1 2 3 18. Personal security 1 2 3 19. Gender stereotype type/bias 1 2 3 20. Poor remuneration 1 2 3 21. Lack of control and accountability of public officials 1 2 3 22. Lack of independent and effective Judiciary 1 2 3 23. Poverty 1 2 3 24. Greed and/or selfishness 1 2 3 25. Job insecurity 1 2 3 26. Any other problem? (SPECIFY) ______________ 1 2 3

902 Of the problems you just mentioned, please tell me, in order of importance, the three

worst problems that Tanzania Mainland faces today

1._________________________________________________________________

2.___________________________________________________________________

3.___________________________________________________________________

903. Are you confident that the government will solve the three problems you just mentioned above? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

PROBLEMS CONFIDENT NOT CONFIDENT DON’T KNOW

01. 1 2 3

85

02. 1 2 3 03. 1 2 3

PART 10: ANALYZING THE CORRUPTION PROBLEM 1001 Please tell me, in your opinion, how do you assess the INTEGRITY of the following

organizations? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS COMPLETELY

DISHONEST DISHONEST

HONEST COMPLETELY

HONEST DO

NOT KNOW

01. Ministry of Finance 1 2 3 4 9 02. Ministry responsible for Public Service 1 2 3 4 9 03. Ministry of Health 1 2 3 4 9 04. Ministry of Education 1 2 3 4 9 05. The High Court 1 2 3 4 9 06. Universities/Institutions of Higher Learning

1 2 3

4 9

07. The Bank of Tanzania 1 2 3 4 9 08. The National Bureau of Statistics 1 2 3 4 9 09. Parliament 1 2 3 4 9

10. Ministry of Infrastructure Development 1 2 3 4 9 11. Police Force 1 2 3 4 9 12. The Army 1 2 3 4 9 13. National Audit Office 1 2 3 4 9 14. City/Municipal/Town/District Council 1 2 3 4 9 1 5. Ministry of Justice 1 2 3 4 9 16. District/Primary Courts 1 2 3 4 9 17. Office of the District Commissioner 1 2 3 4 9 18. Social Security Funds – NSSF /PPF /LGPF /PSPF 1 2 3 4 9

19. BRELA/RITA 1 2 3 4 9 20. Commercial Banks 1 2 3 4 9 21. Ministry of Industry 1 2 3 4 9 22. Ministry of Agriculture 1 2 3 4 9 23. Ministry of Home Affairs 1 2 3 4 9 24. Attorney-General's Chambers 1 2 3 4 9 25. Tanzania Revenue Authority 1 2 3 4 9 26. Directorate Public Prosecution 1 2 3 4 9

86

27. Private Sector 1 2 3 4 9 28. Trade Unions 1 2 3 4 9 29. NGOs 1 2 3 4 9 30. PCCB 1 2 3 4 9 31. Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban

Development1 2 3 4 9

32. Ministry of Labour, Employment and Youth Development

1 2 3

4 9

33. Tanzania Investment Centre 1 2 3 4 9

1002 How efficient/inefficient are each one of the following institutions at exercising social control over public entities? (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

OTHER INSTITUTIONS

COMPLETELY INEFFICIENT

INEFFICIENT EFFICIENT COMPLETELY EFFICIENT

DON'T KNOW

01. Faith Based Institutions –Church/Mosque

1

2

3

4

8

02. Chambers of Commerce 1 2 3 4 8

03. Mass Media 1 2 3 4 8

04. NGO’s 1 2 3 4 8

05. Commission for Human Rights

1 2 3 4

8

06. Trade Unions 1 2 3 4 8

07. Professional Groups 1 2 3 4 8

08. Civic Movements 1 2 3 4 8

09. Community Groups 1 2 3 4 8 10. Permanent Commissioner of

Enquiry 1 2 3 4 8

11. Commissioner for Ethics 1 2 3 4 8

12. Political Parties 1 2 3 4 8

1003. In order of importance, mention 3 entities from the public, private or community sector that you think would be able to lead strategies in the fight against corruption?

1.__________________________________________________________

2.___________________________________________________________

3.___________________________________________________________

1004. Please evaluate the following statement (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

87

There is a genuine and sincere desire to fight against corruption by the following

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

01. Government 1 2 3 4 5 02. Political P ti

1 2 3 4 5 Faith based organizations(Ch 1 2 3 4 5

04. Mass Media 1 2 3 4 5

05. NGOs 1 2 3 4 5

PART 11: PERCEPTION ON WHAT ACTION TO TAKE FOR ANYONE FOUND TO BE INVOLVED IN CORRUPTION

1101. Please evaluate the following statements: (CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE)

Anyone purported/found to be involved in corruption should:

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE INDIFFERENT AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE

01. Be prosecuted 1 2 3 4 5 02. Have his properties confiscated 1 2 3 4 5 03. If public servant, terminated without benefits 1 2 3 4 5

04. Name submitted to the media for public knowledge 1 2 3 4 5

05. Put to jail 1 2 3 4 5 06. Hanged 1 2 3 4 5 07. Put to detention 1 2 3 4 5 08. If in political leadership

position, ripped of leadership i i

1 2 3 4 5

09. If businessperson, business license revoked and name listed for those not to be issued business license

1 2 3 4 5

10. To be heavily fined 1 2 3 4 5 11. Other (SPECIFY) 1 2 3 4 5

88

PART 12: FINAL COMMENTS

1201. In your personal capacity, what steps are you proposing to be taken so that the problem of corruption is reduced?

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____

1202. If you were in a position of the Minister responsible for this sector, what would be the first action that you would undertake so that the problem of corruption is reduced?

1203. If you were in a position of President of the United Republic of Tanzania, what would be the first action that you would undertake to reduce the level of corruption in this country?

RECORD TIME WHEN YOU FINISH THE INTERVIEW (adopt the 12 hour clock)

…………………………………………

Thank You for Your Participation! POST – INTERVIEW INFORMATION

(THIS PART SHOULD BE FILLED OUT BY THE INTERVIEWER AFTER THE INTERVIEW) A. Overall, how was the respondent’s reaction to the interview?

(i) Very positive 1

(ii) Positive 2

(iii) Negative 3

(iv) Very negative 4

B. Overall, how sincere did the respondent seem to be in his/her answers?

(i) Very sincere 1

(ii) Sincere 2

(iii) Not sincere 3

(iv) Very insincere 4

C. Were you, after finishing interviewing your respondent(s), approached by senior officials/management?

(i) Yes 1

(ii) No 2

D. Back check information.

(i) Interview completed 1

(ii) Interview partially completed 2

89

 E. Other Comments by Enumerator

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… F. Comments by Supervisor

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………   

Supervisor’s signature: …………………………………..

Date checked: …../…../2009